Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Forth and Clyde Navigation (Castlecary and Kirkintilloch Road Bridges) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],

Considered; to be read the Third time To-morrow.

NEW WRIT.

For the Borough of Smethwick, in the room of JOHN EMMANUEL DAVISON, esquire (Chiltern Hundreds).—[Mr. Thomas Kennedy.]

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

Copy ordered, "of Return containing an Epitome of the Reports from the Committees of Public Accounts, 1857 to 1925, and of the Treasury Minutes thereon, with an Index."—[Mr. William Graham.]

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

BENGAL CRIMINAL ORDINANCE ACT.

Mr. THURTLE: 1.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he has now ascertained the present views of the Government of India regarding the continued detention of political prisoners under the Bengal Criminal Ordinance Act?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Earl Winterton): My Noble Friend does not expect before the Recess a reply to the reference made to the Government of India.

Oral Answers to Questions — IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

CROWN COLONY LEGISLATIVE COUNCILS.

Mr. PENNY: 5.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when an opportunity will be afforded to discuss the recent decisions reached at the Imperial Conference; and whether, in view of the increased responsibility now undertaken, within the Empire, by the different Dominions, he will consider the desirability of appointing a majority of unofficial representatives on the legislative councils of all our Crown Colonies so as to make the legislation more representative of the general interests?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Amery): The first part of the hon. Member's question will be dealt with by the Prime Minister in reply to a later question. As regards the second part of the question, the Colonies not possessing responsible government are in widely varying stages of development and there are many cases in which for many years to come it will not be practicable or desirable to provide for a majority of unofficial representatives in the legislative councils. As my hon. Friend is no doubt aware, constitutional changes that have been made in the last few years have resulted in the grant of a considerable: measure of representative institutions to several Colonies, and it does not appear that at the moment there is any instance in which a further extension of such institutions is desirable.

Mr. PENNY: Will the right hon. Gentleman take it into his sympathetic consideration to make this alteration as soon as lie thinks it advisable to do so, so that we can have a more progressive and democratic form of government?

Mr. AMERY: I am always sympathetic in such matters.

BRITISH FILMS (AUSTRALIA).

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 20.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether any and, if so, what action is being taken in Australia with regard to the recommendations of the Imperial Conference in connection with British films?

Mr. AMERY: The Report of the Sub-Committee of the Imperial Conference on the subject of films, which has been
published, referred to certain action which had already been taken in Australia; but I have no information as to any action taken there since the Conference, and, indeed, there has not been time for the recommendations of the Conference to reach Australia otherwise than in the form of a telegraphed summary.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the cable by Reuter to the effect that the question is now being dealt with by the Commonwealth Legislature?

Mr. AMERY: No, Sir.

AIR COMMUNICATIONS.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 35.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he proposes to publish for the information of the House the Report and Memorandum which he gave to the Imperial Conference respecting Imperial air communications; and will he state when such Report will he available at the Vote Office?

The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Samuel Hoare): Yes, Sir; the Memorandum which I presented to the Imperial Conference, together with the Report of the Sub-Committee of the Conference, is being published as a Departmental Paper, and it will he available, I hope, on 15th December at the Vote Office, where hon. Members will be able to obtain copies gratis upon application.

INTER-IMPERIAL RELATIONS.

Sir JOHN MARRIOTT: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether it is proposed to give the House of Commons the opportunity of discussing the Report of the Inter-Imperial Relations Committee of the Imperial Conference, 1026, apart from the specific legislative proposals which may be necessary to carry out the recommendations of the committee?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): In the normal course of business, there will be many opportunities next Session when matters arising out of the Imperial Conference will be raised. It is not, therefore, proposed to allocate a special day for it during this Session.

Mr. THOMAS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is the intention to publish the Economic Report?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should like to have notice of that question. I do not happen to know.

Captain WEDGWOOD SENN: Does the right bon. Gentleman not think it would be desirable to grant time for discussing particularly the Government's official attitude in relation to the Mandates Committee of the League?

The PRIME MINISTER: I think discussion would be more likely to bear fruit if Members had time to think about it first.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL TRADE DISPUTE.

CROWN COLONIES AND PROTECTORATES (DEVELOPMENT WORK).

Mr. RAMSDEN: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the total extent to which the dispute in the coal industry has held up the work of development in the Crown Colonies, Protectorates, and Mandated Territories in so far as contracts are concerned which were placed before the beginning of the dispute?

Mr. AMERY: A definite estimate is not possible, but in many cases deliveries under contracts involving the use of steel placed before the dispute will be delayed from six to eight months. Materials are usually ordered in advance of requirements, and it is not possible to state to what extent this delay has affected the work of development. In certain instances it has been possible to complete urgent contracts by using Continental steel.

UNEMPLOYED MINERS.

Mr. FORREST: 30.
asked the Minister of Labour whether the Government is considering any schemes to find employment for the miners who have permanently lost their employment in the mines; and, if so, what action is contemplated or is being taken in connection with this matter?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of LABOUR (Mr. Betterton): As the hon. Member will know, the extent to which miners will not be reabsorbed depends on a great many factors, and it would be premature, indeed impossible, to attempt to deal with it until the position becomes much clearer
than it is at present. I can assure the hon. Member, however, that it is a problem which is engaging the close attention of the Government.

Mr. OLIVER: May I ask what steps the Ministry is taking to see that men whom the colliery companies have refused to take back on the ground of the active part they took during the strike, are reinstated?

Mr. BETTERTON: That is an entirely different question, and if the hon. Gentleman will either put down a question or see me, I will give him what information I can.

Mr. PALING: Do I understand that the Minister is going to do nothing in this respect until he sees what effect the lengthening of the working day is going to have on the industry?

Mr. BETTERTON: No; what I said was that it would be premature to give any information until we know the size of the problem we have to face.

Mr. PALING: Is the hon. Gentleman of opinion that the lengthening of the working day will increase the number of men employed in the industry?

PRICES.

Mr. BROCKLEBANK: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the setting up of a Coal Council with powers and functions analogous to those already granted to the Food Council?

The PRIME MINISTER: I do not think that such action as my hon. Friend suggests is called for.

Mr. PALING: May I ask whether it is a fact that the right hon. Gentleman is not so much interested in reducing the price of coal as he was in increasing the miners' hours?

HON. MEMBERS: Order!

Mr. PALING: He will get a lot of that before it is finished.

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a matter to be dealt with at Question Time.

Mr. W. BAKER: 31.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of trades in which his Department is aware that a control over prices is exercised; and the date on which the summary of
the available information is likely to he published by the Committee on Industry and Trade?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Burton Chadwick): I understand that the Committee hope that the Volume, which will include this summary, may be published early next year. I do not propose to give any particulars in advance.

Oral Answers to Questions — NYASALAND (PEOHIBITION OF NEWSPAPERS).

Mr. W. BAKER: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the grounds on which "The Negro World" and "The Workers' Herald" are prohibited in Nyasaland?

Mr. AMERY: If it be the case that the introduction of these publications is prohibited in Nyasaland, such prohibition has been enforced by the exercise by the Governor in Council of the powers given him by the Seditious Publications (Prohibition) Ordinance. It is a matter for the Governor in Council to decide whether any publication should be prohibited, and he is not required to report the grounds on which he finds it necessary to take such action.

Mr. BAKER: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire as to the grounds for prohibition, seeing that the second paper appears to circulate freely in the Union of South Africa?

Mr. AMERY: I will consider that.

Sir HARRY BRITTAIN: Is it not the case that anyone who knows these particular papers thinks their prohibition shows excellent judgment on the part of Nyasaland?

Mr. CECIL WILSON: When was the Ordinance published?

Mr. AMERY: I think, in 1917.

Oral Answers to Questions — OPIUM.

Mr. PENNY: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that his Department has instructed the Government of the Straits Settlements to set aside 10 per cent. annually from revenues for the purposes
of the opium revenue reserve fund; that opinion both in Malaya and here is strongly opposed to any allocation of money to this fund; that the Government of the Straits Settlements, having carried the proposal by the use of its official majority, still proposes to give effect to it; and that the Colony has raised no objection to the eventual loss of its opium revenue and is quite ready to face new taxation to replace it; and for what reason his Department has taken the action referred to?

Mr. AMERY: The Straits Settlements Opium Revenue Replacement Fund was set up by the Straits Settlements Government with my approval with a view to ensuring that the finances of the Colony should be placed on such a basis that they will not be disorganised by the shrinkage in the revenue derived from opium which is bound to occur when circumstances (at present outside the control of the Colonial Government) render it possible to give full effect to the obligations undertaken in the Hague Opium Convention, 1912, and the Protocol to the Geneva Opium Agreement of 1925. The Straits Settlements Government was also influenced by the desire of His Majsty's Government that it should be made clear to the world that the Colonial Government was not being deterred by financial considerations from taking such steps as were possible to give effect to its' international obligations. The scheme for the creation of the fund was drawn up by a committee of unofficial members of the Legislative Council presided over by the Colonial Treasurer, and their recommendations, both as to the lump sum with which the fund was inaugurated and as to the annual contributions' to be made to the fund were adopted by the Straits Settlements Government. These recommendations were based on a full review of the Colony's financial commitments and of the prospects of increasing taxation to make good the deficiency which may be expected to occur.
I am aware that there is much opposition in the Colony to the annual allocation to the fund of 10 per cent. of the revenue of the Colony. I have also received representations from the Association of British Malaya in this country. I am, however, happy to be in a position to assure my hon. Friend that on none of the occasions when this matter has
been before the Legislative Council of the Colony has use been made of the Official Vote in the manner suggested.

Mr. CECIL WILSON: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, as a result of the Government of India's decision to reduce by 10 per cent. per annum the export of opium except for medical and scientific purposes, the imports into British Dependencies in the Far East will be proportionately reduced; and whether he can give an assurance that opium for purposes of smoking will not, be imported from other sources to compensate for the reduction in the imports from India?

Mr. AMERY: No, Sir. No such reduction would, in my opinion, be practicable in present circumstances.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUBBER.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can give a reliable estimate of the world's consumption of lubber during the current year, and how much of this commodity is supplied by the British Empire?

Mr. AMERY: The most reliable estimate that I can give of the purchase of rubber by manufacturers for the current year is approximately 550,000 tons. Empire territories produce 60 to 65 per cent. of the estimated world's production of rubber for the same period.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 12.
also asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the official Report received from the Straits Settlements that the recent regulation regarding unused coupons was the result of a compromise reached between the Malayan assessment committees and the advisory board in Great Britain, the former showing a majority in favour of cancellation; and if he can state whether the advisory board have reconsidered the matter?

Mr. AMERY: I have seen no such official Report. The recent decision with regard to export permits already issued, as distinct from permits to he issued after 1st of February next, was taken after consideration of the views of the Malayan committee, but was not a com promise on that question. I see no reason for re-consideration of the matter.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this decision has given great dissatisfaction, and caused great uncertainty in the market?

Mr. AMERY: I am afraid there is no decision that would not give some dissatisfaction.

Mr. PENNY: Has the right hon. Gentleman yet received figures as to the amount of rubber stored against these unused coupons?

Mr. AMERY: I promise my hon. Friend to let him have them as soon as I have got them.

Oral Answers to Questions — MALAY STATES (ARMISTICE DAY CELEBRATIONS).

Mr. PENNY: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware of the resentment felt in the Malay States at the refusal to allow a military parade and church service to be held at Kuala Lumpur on Armistice Day similar to that permitted in Singapore; and whether he will see that permission is granted in future to the Malay States to give public expression to the memory of those who gave their lives for the Empire in the Great War in a similar manner to that given in Singapore?

Mr. AMERY: I have no information, but will ask the High Commissioner for a report.

Oral Answers to Questions — EMPIRE MARKETING BOARD (ADVERTISING).

Sir WALTER de FRECE: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the amount hitherto spent by the Empire Marketing Board in advertising; the total sum allocated, for this purpose during the present financial year; and what results have been obtained to date?

Mr. AMERY: A sum of £120,000 has provisionally been allocated in the present financial year for Press and poster advertising, and the charges actually incurred to date under these two headings are, approximately, £20,000. The poster advertising will not begin until the New Year. The newspaper advertising has been in progress for a few weeks only, and I am sure that my hon. Friend will recognise that it would be too early
to attempt any confident judgment of its results.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Can, the right hon. Gentleman say what proportion is devoted to the Press and what to posters?

Mr. AMERY: If my hon. Friend will put a question on the Paper, I will try to get the figures.

Oral Answers to Questions — EMPIRE SETTLEMENT.

Sir W. de FRECE: 14.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if there are any parts of the British Empire which encourage the immigration of settlers untrained in agricultural work; and, if so, they are and the types of opening available?

Mr. AMERY: I would refer my hon. Friend to the Report of the Oversea Settlement Sub-Committee of the Imperial Conference, especially paragraphs 10, 75 and 76. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the Report for his perusal.

Mr. RAMSDEN: 18.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he has considered the Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee appointed to consider the effect on migration of schemes of social insurance; and whether it is proposed to give effect to any of these recommendations?

Mr. AMERY: The position is as follows: In accordance with the first recommendation of the Inter-Departmental Committee the general question of the standardisation of schemes of social insurance throughout the Empire was considered by the Imperial Conference, and the result of its deliberations is contained in Section VI of the Report of the Oversea Settlement Sub-Committee of the Conference which has already been published in the Press. The recommendations in regard to Contributory Pensions and National Health Insurance will involve legislation, and I understand that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health will deal with the matter when amending legislation is next introduced. The recommendation as to publicity is being acted upon. The question of extended facilities for training juveniles in rural occupations is still under consideration.

Mr. BARCLAY-HARVEY: 21.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs if the British Government is bearing any share in the cost of the recent reduction from £3 to £2 of the special fares for emigrants to Canada?

Mr. AMERY: Yes, Sir. One half of the cost of this reduction is being borne by His Majesty's Government under the Empire Settlement Act.

Sir FREDRIC WISE: What is the total cost?

Mr. AMERY: I must ask my hon. Friend to put that question on the Paper.

Oral Answers to Questions — LABOUR COLONIES.

Mr. W. BAKER: 25.
asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the overcrowded condition of casual wards, he is prepared to recommend the creation of labour colonies in selected parts of England?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): This matter will continue to receive my right hon. Friend's careful consideration, but he can see no prospect of being able to formulate proposals until some measure of Poor Law reform has been secured.

Oral Answers to Questions — INFANTILE PARALYSIS.

Colonel GRETTON: 26.
asked the Minister of Health if there have been any further outbreaks of infantile paralysis in the county of Rutland; if so, what is the date of the latest recorded case; and if he can say the length of

—
Provisions.
Beers, Minerals, Spirits, etc.





£
s.
d.
£
s.
d.


February, 1926
…
…
30
6
3
110
6
10


March, 1926
…
…
31
14
6
120
10
8


April, 1926 (Easter Recess, 2nd to 12th)
…
…
21
0
3
75
6
2


May, 1926 (Whitsun Recess, 21st to 31st)
…
…
15
2
7
54
3
1


June, 1926
…
…
30
18
6
143
18
11


July and to 5th August, 1926
…
…
30
13
3
144
13
7


August, 1926, Emergency Session
…
…
2
12
11
11
4
8


September, 1926, Emergency Session
…
…
3
10
1
11
9
0


October, 1926, Emergency Session
…
…
3
5
11
9
12
5


November, 192G (9th to 27th)
…
…
14
16
2
55
1
4

the period which his Department considers should elapse before danger of infection or contagion ceases in ordinary cases of this disease?

Sir K. WOOD: No further cases of this disease have been notified in Rutland since the occurrence of two cases at Uppingham School during the week ended the 13th November. As regards the last part of the question, in the present state of knowledge of this disease it is the practice of my right hon. Friend's Department to recommend the Isolation of patients who have been attacked by it for a period of six weeks from the date of onset of the disease.

Colonel GRETTON: Can the hon. Gentleman say what is the period during which eases or suspected cases should be isolated?

Sir K. WOOD: I should prefer my right hon. Friend to put that question on the Paper.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSE OF COMMONS (REFRESHMENTS TO STRANGERS).

Mr. LOWTH: 36.
asked the right hon. Member for Cheltenham, as Chairman of the Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms Committee, the amount of the receipts in sales of food and drink in the Strangers' Smoking Room during each of the months of 1926 to date?

Sir JAMES AGG-GARDNER: In reply to the question of the hon. Member, as the details are too numerous for me to read to the House, I will, with his permission, send them to him, and I imagine that they will also appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The particulars supplied are as follow:

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA.

FOREIGN NAVAL FORGES.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 37.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can inform the House of the approximate strength of foreign naval forces cooperating with our own in Chinese waters?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Davidson): I would refer my hon. Friend to the First Lord's reply of the 1st December to the hon. Member for Camlachie [OFFICIAL REPORT, columns 1177–8].

Sir H. BRITTAIN: May I ask whether that is a full list of the foreign forces that were available? Would it include the Japanese Navy?

Mr. DAVIDSON: Yes.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: 38.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the existing position in China has been brought to the attention of the League of Nations, and what action has been taken by the League of Nations thereon?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Godfrey Locker-Lampson): The state of affairs to China has not been brought to the attention of the League of Nations. The second part of my hon. Friend's question, therefore, does not arise.

Sir W. DAVISON: Can the hon. Gentseman inform the House why this very important matter has not been brought to the attention of the League of Nations, especially as the representative of China is a member of the Council of the League?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: We think that at the present moment it would not serve any useful purpose to bring it before the League. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] Anyhow, I think we certainly ought to await the Report of our new Minister to China, who is now on his way to Hankow.

Captain BENN: Is it not a fact that the Chinese delegate attempted to raise the subject in the League, and that his action was criticised by our own representative?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: It is certainly true that some very inaccurate statements were made by the Chinese delegate.

Captain BENN: Then we may take it that, from the Chinese point of view, an attempt has already been made to raise the matter?

SITUATION AT HANKOW.

Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKE: 39.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can make any further statement as to the position at Hankow?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: I am glad to be able to state that the latest news from Hankow shows a very appreciable improvement. The general strike, which, as the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition was informed on the 1st December, was threatened for the 4th December, has not materialised, nor has the Customs strike, which was mentioned in the reply given to him on the 29th November.
His Majesty's Consul-General at Hankow reports that the strike in the Japanese concession has been settled; negotiations for the settlement of other disputes are in progress; and the labour situation is appreciably easier for the moment. Unions are being formed daily, and demands for increase of wages will inevitably follow, but His Majesty's Consul-General does not anticipate that they will be of an impossible nature; the Chinese authorities appear for the moment to be inclined to restrain the Unions.
The Chinese authorities also appear to be making an effort to secure the observance of the concession regulations, and it is hoped that the naval guards will be withdrawn to-day.
His Majesty's Minister, Mr. Lampson, is now on his way to Hankow, in order to examine the situation on the spot.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Does the hon. Gentleman really believe that it is advisable to withdraw the naval guards?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: I can assure my hon. Friend that everything possible will be done for the protection of British life.

Mr. LOOKER: Can the hon. Gentleman tell us the date of that report from Hankow?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: The telegram reached us this morning.

RUSSIAN INFLUENCE.

Commander OLIVER LOCKERLAMPSON: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether he can grant a day before Christmas for the discussion of the Russian State's influence in relation to the troubles in China?

The PRIME MINISTER: In view of the fact that His Majesty's new Minister to China has just reached that country, and is making a personal investigation of the situation as it presents itself in various parts of the country, I think that such a Debate would be prejudicial at the present time.

Commander LOCKER-LAMPSON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman exactly what further injuries and insults this country must suffer before we take action—

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must not make a speech in the form of a question.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks the recent speech delivered by the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) is very helpful?

Mr. TAYLOR: Does the Prime Minister not think the relations at present existing between Britain and Russia are sufficiently important to warrant a day being given to their discussion before Christmas?

The PRIME MINISTER: That rather begs the question, as far as my answer goes. My answer said that, in the view of the Government, a Debate would be prejudicial while our new Minister is meeting with various leaders in China—in Hankow and other places—so as to enable him to report. I quite agree that it is a subject worthy of discussion in this House, but the present moment I think would be inopportune.

Commander LOCKER-LAMPSON: May we have a discussion next year, when we meet again?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should think I may promise that with safety.

Oral Answers to Questions — STATE-AIDED SCHOOLS (FOREIGN LANGUAGES).

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 43.
asked the President of the Board of Education whether, in the teaching of foreign languages in the State-aided schools, a proportion of the time is devoted to the study of the spoken as against the written language; and whether a conversation test is part of the first schools examination pass?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Lord Eustace Percy): As regards the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave him on 30th November last. As regards the second part, a conversational test is always provided, though it is not always a compulsory part of the examination in the subject.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question on the Order Paper, which is not answered in the question to which he refers, as to the proportion of time devoted to the study of the spoken against the written language?

Lord E. PERCY: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will realise that the proportion of time given to reading and speaking varies with every teacher in every School.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: May I ask for something like a rough estimate?

Lord E. PERCY: The only estimate I could give would be so rough as to be of no service.

Sir HENRY CRAIK: Is it not absolutely necessary that freedom should be left to the teachers?

Oral Answers to Questions — CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS ACT.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 28.
asked the Minister of Health how many applications for an orphan pension under the Widows', Orphans', and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act., 1925, have been received; how many have been granted; how many
have been rejected; and how many applications are still undecided?

Sir K. WOOD: On the lastest figures available, the total number of applications for orphans' pensions received in England, Scotland and Wales is 16,239, but this figure includes 718 claims which were withdrawn or were duplicate claims. The number of claims for examination was, therefore, 15,521, of which 11,611 have been awarded, 3,518 rejected and 392 are still undecided. My right hon. Friend would point out that an application may include more than one child.

Mr. WILLIAMS: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of these cases after six months have not yet been decided, and can he explain the delay?

Sir K. WOOD: If the hon. Member will give me particulars, as I have often said to him, I will make inquiries.

Oral Answers to Questions — ARMY MEAT (PRICES).

Mr. LOWTH: 44.
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office the price per pound of imported meat supplied to the Army during 1924–25; and the price paid during the current year?

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 49.
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office the price per pound of chilled meat and the price of frozen meat supplied to the troops in the year 1924–25 and the current year?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King): As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL, REPORT.

Following is the answer:

There are a large number of contracts involved in the supply of meat to the Army, but the following figures show the approximate average price:





Beef.
Mutton.





Per lb.
Per lb.





d.
d.


1925
…
…
4.997
7.371


1926
…
…
4.931
6.228


Mutton has not been supplied to the troops since 1st April last. Chilled meat is not purchased by the War Department.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

HEBRIDES (MAIL SERVICES).

Mr. MacKENZIE LIVINGSTONE: 34.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he will bear in mind, when negotiating the new mail contracts for the Hebridean mail services, the necessity for providing for the accommodation of the increasing tourist traffic, especially to the more distant islands?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): I have been asked to reply. All aspects of the traffic to the islands will be borne in mind.

Mr. LIVINGSTONE: Will the Secretary of State for Scotland do what he can to raise the present low standard of ships carrying mails to the islands?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Oh, yes we are now actively engaged in negotiations.

SMALL HOLDINGS.

Colonel DAY (for Mr. N. MACLEAN): 40.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many applicants for land in Skye have died or emigrated from the Highlands since their applications for land were origiNally lodged with the Scottish Board of Agriculture?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir. I have not statistics on these points.

Colonel DAY (for Mr. N. MACLEAN): 42.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that, notwithstanding urgent demands for land since the Board of Agriculture came into office, there are still parishes or quoad sacra parishes in Skye where no land has been taken by the Board for small holdings; and, if so, whether he can state the amount of suitable land available for small holdings or enlargement of existing holdings in such parishes in Skye?

Sir J. GILMOUR: As regards the first part of the hon. Member's question there is only one of the seven parishes in Skye in which the Board of Agriculture have not as yet settled new holders. As regards the second part of the question there are areas in that parish which might be available for small holdings. I am not in possession of information as to the acreage of such areas. The
Board of Agriculture are, however, at present in negotiation for a scheme of settlement on a farm in that parish.

CONON LODGE.

Colonel DAY (for Mr. NEIL MACLEAN): 41.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is able to state if the purchaser of Conon Lodge intends using the lodge merely as a shooting lodge; and, if so, whether the Board of Agriculture is offering any land to him for shooting purposes?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. The Board of Agriculture have not offered any land to the purchases' for shooting purposes.

Oral Answers to Questions — FOREIGN SECRETARY (ABSENCE FROM ENGLAND).

Colonel GRETTON: 48.
asked the Prime Minister which member of the Government is in charge of the business of the Foreign Office, and particularly as regards affairs in China, during the absence of the Foreign Secretary; and when the latter is expected to return to this country?

The PRIME MINISTER: During the absence of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who is in attendance at the Council meeting of the League of Nations at Geneva, I am in charge of the Foreign Office. I expect my right hon. Friend will return to this country as soon as he has discharged his mission to Geneva.

Oral Answers to Questions — ARCOS, LIMITED (RUSSSIAN EMPLOYES).

Commander OLIVER LOCKERLAMPSON: 51.
asked the Secretary of State For the Home Department how many Russians are now employed by Arcos and its subsidiary companies in England?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Captain Hacking): I am informed that 184 Soviet citizens are employed by Arcos and 216 by other companies in the United Kingdom.

Commander LOCKER-LAMPSON: Cannot a few unemployed Englishmen be imported, as well as Russians?

Mr. TAYLOR: Can the hon. Gentleman give us the number of English people employed by Arcos?

Captain HACKING: Not without notice.

Mr. TAYLOR: Is it not the fact that they outnumber considerably the alien employés?

Captain HACKING: I cannot say without notice.

Mr. TAYLOR: Can the hon. Gentleman say how many of the 184 consist of Russians who have come to this country since the revolution, and how many represent Russians resident here before?

Mr. SPEAKER: The Minister has already intimated that he must have notice of these supplementary questions.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Can the hon. Gentleman say how long these 184 aliens are going to be here?

Mr. EVERARD: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the majority of the people of this country think it is 184 too many?

Mr. HARDIE: You must have people to speak the language; you have gat to bring them over.

Oral Answers to Questions — BETTING DUTY.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 52.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many bookmakers' licences have been issued to date, and how the number compares with the Treasury estimate?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): The number of bookmakers' certificates issued up to 30th November inclusive was 10,479. No official estimate was formed of the number of bookmakers.

Colonel DAY: 53.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that many bookmakers are levying the Betting Duty against winnings as well as against the amount staked as a bet by backers of horses; and will he con-
sider the introduction of legislation to prohibit bookmakers exploiting the Act against backers in this manner?

Mr. McNEILL: Under Section 15 of the Finance Act, 1926, Betting Duty is charged on every bet made with a bookmaker and is payable to the Revenue authorities by the bookmaker with whom the bet is made. I am not aware that the practice mentioned in the question is being adopted, but the Exchequer is not concerned with the methods by which the bookmaker passes on the tax to the hacker, and my right hon. Friend is not prepared to initiate legislation as suggested.

Colonel DAY: If I forward proof that the bookmakers are charging not only on the amount staked but on the winnings, will the right hon. Gentleman make investigations?

Mr. McNEILL: No, Sir: I have pointed out that it is no concern of ours at all.

Colonel DAY: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that bookmakers ought to exploit the public in this way?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is a matter of opinion.

Oral Answers to Questions — CORPORATION PROFITS TAX (ARREARS).

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 54.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state the unpaid arrears of Corporation Profits Tax now outstanding?

Mr. McNEILL: The approximate amount of Corporation Profits Tax in assessment but unpaid at 30th November, 1926, was £10,500,000. These arrears are in many cases subject to reduction on appeal or otherwise, and represent, therefore, a higher figure than will ultimately be collected.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what amount of this £10,500,000 the Treasury anticipate they will get?

Mr. McNEILL: No, Sir; I cannot say that.

Oral Answers to Questions — EXCESS PROFITS DUTY AND MUNITIONS LEVY.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 55.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total receipts and the repayments of Excess Profits Duty and munitions saving since 31st March, 1926, and the estimated gross and net arrears now outstanding?

Mr. McNEILL: The approximate gross receipt of Excess Profits Duty (including Munitions Levy) for the period from 1st April, 1926, to 30th November, 1926, was £4,544,000, and repayments during the same period amounted to 23,540,0.10, leaving a net receipt of £1,004,000. It is estimated that the total amount of duty in assessment but not paid is in the neighbourhood of £100,000,000; of this amount, however, very large sums are subject to adjustment on appeal or otherwise, and the duty to be ultimately received by the Exchequer will therefore fall far short of the nominal amount in assessment.

Oral Answers to Questions — NORTHERN IRELAND (PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS, RENTS).

Sir F. WISE: 56.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the rent of the temporary assembly buildings of the Parliament building, etc., for the Government of Northern Ireland?

Mr. McNEILL: The rents of the buildings referred to, including the Supreme Court, amount to about £28,000 a year.

Sir F. WISE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what I he tenancy is—for how many years?

Mr. McNEILL: I could not say without notice.

Oral Answers to Questions — SURNAMES.

Commander BELLAIRS: 57.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the number of persons who change their names and to the number of persons who object to the appropriation of their surnames by other people; and whether he will consider taxation both ways, so that anyone registering his name on payment of a fixed fee can prevent another person, during his lifetime, taking that name by deed poll without his permission, and
anyone wishing to appropriate a new name other than a registered one should pay a substantial sum for the privilege?

Captain HACKING: I have been asked to reply. The object which my hon. and gallant Friend has in view could only be attained by legislation which would involve a radical change in the law relating to surnames. Even if such a change were desirable, I do not think it could be effected on the lines suggested in the Question.

Oral Answers to Questions — MUSEUM EXHIBIT (CAPTAIN J. BALL).

Colonel DAY: 58.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury if his attention has been drawn to the letter addressed to the Treasury Solicitor's Department by Captain John Ball; whether he is aware that a valuable exhibit belonging to Captain Ball, and on loan to a museum without charge, has been seized by agents of the Official Receiver; and whether, in view of Captain Ball's service in the loyal Naval Air Service and the Royal Air Force, he will accede to the request of this ex-officer that the matter of dispute be settled by compromise?

Mr. DAVIDSON: I have been asked to reply. I am aware of the circumstances referred to in the first two parts of the question, but I regret that I am unable to accede to the request contained in the last part.

Oral Answers to Questions — SOMERSET HOUSE (ATTENDANT STAFF).

Mr. KELLY: 59.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether any steps are being taken to reorganise the attendance staff at Somerset House; and, if so, what steps are being taken to preserve the status and conditions of the present holders of attendant posts in that Department?

Mr. McNEILL: The question is under consideration whether the duties of protection of Somerset House at night, which are performed by staff of the Inland Revenue, should be undertaken in future by His Majesty's Office of Works. The Inland Revenue staff concerned are unestablished men, recruited normally
from police pensioners upon a weekly engagement. In the event of the transfer being made, it is proposed to offer employment under the Office of Works so far as possible to men becoming redundant.

Mr. KELLY: Has this matter had any consideration from the General Industrial Council?

Mr. McNEILL: I could not say without notice.

Oral Answers to Questions — LIGHT DUES.

Mr. KELLY: 60.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the amount of Light Dues received in 1924, 1925, and for the year 1926 up to the end of October?

Sir B. CHADWICK: I have been asked to reply. The answer contains a number of figures, and the hon. Member will perhaps agree to it being circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT?

Following is the answer:

The amounts of Light Dues received in 1024–25, 1925–26, and during the current financial year, are as follows:—

In respect of lights, etc., in Great Britain and Ireland:—



£
s.
d.


Year ended 31st March, 1925
597,252
8
7


Year ended 31st March, 1926
728,632
0
10


Period from 1st April to 31st, October, 1926
537,376
5
4

In respect of the Basses and Minicoy Lights:—



£
s
d.


Year ended 31st March, 1925
19,111
14
0


Year ended 31st March, 1926
13,124
0
8


Period from 1st April to 30th June, 1926
2,779
10
11

The bulk of the Basses and Minicoy Dues is collected at ports in India, Ceylon and the Straits Settlements, and complete accounts are not available later than 30th June, 1926.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

TOLL BRIDGES.

Colonel DAY: 61.
asked the Minister of Transport if he is yet able to make any statement with regard to toll bridges?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): In September, 1925, I caused a Circular to be issued to all local authorities calling attention to the provisions of the Roads Improvement Act, 1925, regarding the freeing of toll roads and bridges. In many districts the matter is engaging the close attention of the local authorities, with whom the initiative must rest, and who are in consultation with officers of my Department. In a few cases the proposals for freeing existing bridges are now assuming a definite shape, and in other instances the erection of a new toll-free bridge is in contemplation.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman do anything to facilitate the freeing of these toll bridges, which are a great expense to people living in the immediate neighbourhood, who in going backwards and forwards sometimes have to pay 3s. and 4s a day?

Colonel ASHLEY: I quite appreciate the hon. Member's point, and I am doing all I can, but I must make it clear to the House that the initiative in all these matters rests with the local authorities.

Mr. TAYLOR: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider taking a general step to free all toll bridges—taking it on the initiative of his Department?

Colonel ASHLEY: The hon. Member's proposal raises very large financial considerations which I cannot entertain at the present moment.

Mr. PENNY: Will the right hon. Gentleman urge local authorities to take over the toll bridges owned by private individuals, which form a very great burden on products of industry having to use those bridges?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am pointing out in my answer that I did send out a Circular last year defining the powers of local authorities under the Act.

Mr. PENNY: Will the right hon. Gentleman send out another Circular?

Mr. TAYLOR: Will the right hon. Gentleman pay special attention to the necessity for laying down a sound basis for compensation in a case that is likely to come before him presently; and will he see that the public are not fleeced by compensation being based on unreasonable toll charges?

Mr. SPEAKER: think that point does not arise.

FLY-OVER BRIDGE, STRATFORD.

Mr. RHYS: 62.
asked the Minister of Transport the estimated cost of the flyover at Stratford, for which the London and North Eastern Railway Company has obtained Parliamentary sanction?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am informed by the railway company that the estimated cost of the fly-over junction at Stratford, together with certain ancillary works authorised by the company's Act of 1924, was £1,188,000, and that these works form part only of a scheme which, so far as can be seen from the estimates at present prepared, will involve a total expenditure approaching £3,000,000.

Sir F. WISE: 63.
asked the Minister of Transport if the London and North Eastern Railway Company is constructing the fly-over at Stratford for which Parliament allowed the company to raise money against this expenditure?

Colonel ASHLEY: The railway company have informed me that in view of the large expenditure involved they are considering whether there is any alternative scheme which could he carried out at less cost.

Sir F. WISE: As this was specially recommended in the Traffic Report, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will press on the railway the necessity of seeing that it is carried out?

Colonel ASHLEY: My hon. Friend knows that this is not a very propitious moment to press the railway companies to increase capital expenditure.

Sir F. WISE: Is it not really a case of increasing the interest on the issue, and they would get their money?

Mr. R. MORRISON: Does the right hon. Gentleman not recollect that when the Bill granting these powers was discussed in this House, the representatives
of the railway company stated that one of the reasons why they were anxious to get on with the work was to provide work for the unemployed?

Colonel ASHLEY: Yes; but the hon. Gentleman has forgotten that there has been a coal strike since—

HON. MEMBERS: A lock-out!

BROMPTON ROAD TUBE STATION (SUNDAY TRAINS).

Sir W. DAVISON: 64.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he will take steps, through the Traffic Advisory Committee, to secure the opening of -Die Brompton Road Tube Station to the public on Sundays as soon as possible, having regard to the inconvenience now suffered by persons desiring to attend the services at the Brompton Oratory, Brompton Parish Church, and other churches in the neighbourhood?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am in communication with the railway company in the matter, and will let my hon. Friend know the result.

Mr. MONIAGUE: Is the Minister aware of the fact that the York Road Station on the same line is also closed on Sundays, and that before the closing there was a bigger Sunday traffic than at Brompton Road?

Colonel ASHLEY: If the hon. Member will supply me with particulars, I will communicate with the company.

Oral Answers to Questions — KENYA.

DEFENCE FORCE.

Mr. RENNIE SMITH: 15
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) whether he can give the House an assurance that any cost of the proposed European conscript defence force in Kenya Colony will be met by a tax levied upon the conscripts, and will not be charged upon the general revenue of the country?
(2) if he can give the names of the subcommittee of the Overseas Committee to which the question of a defence force of European settlers for Kenya Colony was remitted?

Mr. AMERY: The answer to both questions is in the negative.

Mr. SMITH: Do I understand that in the event of compulsory service being imposed in Kenya the right hon. Gentleman proposes to raise the money for that costly development from general taxation?

Mr. AMERY: The development at present costs nothing. It is only a law involving an obligation in certain circumstances.

SENTENCE ON NATIVE.

Mr. R. SMITH: 17.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is yet in a position to give information about the case of Jasper Abraham of Kenya?

Mr. AMERY: No, Sir; but I am making inquiries of the Governor by mail.

Oral Answers to Questions — FOREIGN MEAT (IMPORT PROHIBITION).

Rear-Admiral SUETER: 23.
asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he can give an assurance that adequate warning shall be given to those engaged in the agricultural industry before the embargo on foreign veal and pork is removed?

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for North Cornwall on the 11th November.

Oral Answers to Questions — OUT-OF-WORK DONATION (EX-RANKER OFFICERS).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 29.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that ranker officers receive the pension of non-commissioned officers, but do not receive out-of-work donation under the scheme in operation in 1920; and whether he will take steps to see that ex-ranker officers receiving the same pension as ex-non-commissioned officers shall be accorded equal treatment in the matter of out-of-work donation?

Mr. BETTERTON: The out-of-work donation scheme came to an end some years ago, and no payments under it have been made since 1922.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Could anybody claim arrears under this scheme?

Mr. BETTERTON: No, Sir, I thick not. What the hon. Gentleman asked was whether I would take steps to see that ex-ranker officers receiving the same pension as ex-non-commissioned officers would be accorded equal treatment in the matter of out-of-work donation. My answer to that is that officers, whether ex-ranker or otherwise, were not entitled to out-of-work donation. The whole scheme came to an end in 1922, and did not apply to officers.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is he not aware that these ex-officers claimed the money at the time before their claim as ex-ranker-officers was settled, and it was decided by the Government that these men were non-commissioned officers, and drew the pension as non-commissioned officers, and now when they claim the money which was due to them as non-commissioned officers they are informed that they are officers for the purposes of this scheme, and can he rectify that?

Mr. BETTERTON: I think the hon. Gentleman is entirely under a misapprehension in regard to this matter, and in any case we could not reopen a matter which came to an end in 1922.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: Might I ask the Prime Minister what business he proposes to take to-day if he gets his Resolution for the suspension of the Eleven o'Clock Rule?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should like to take the first three Orders.

Mr. MacDONALD: If the right hon. Gentleman gets his Resolution, as I dare say he will, could he not also consider taking the fourth Order, the University of London Bill, which is, I am informed, to all intents and purposes an agreed Bill?

The PRIME MINISTER: Certainly, I shall be very glad to do so. I was not so ambitious in my estimate.

Motion made and Question put,
That the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 179; Noes, 81.

Division No. 528.]
AYES.
[3.28 p.m.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Albery, Irving James
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Haslam, Henry C.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hawke, John Anthony


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Apsley, Lord
Dawson, Sir Philip
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur p.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Dixey, A. C.
Herbert,S. (York, N.R.,Scar & Wh'by)


Atkinson, C.
Drewe, C.
Hills, Major John Waller


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hoare, Lt. -Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St.Marylebone)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Elliott, Major Walter E.
Hope, Capt A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Elveden, Viscount
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Berry, Sir George
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Betterton, Henry B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Huntingfield, Lord


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hard, Percy A.


Bowater, Col. Sir T Vansittart
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hutchison, G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Fielden, E. B.
Jacob, A. E.


Briggs, J. Harold
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
James, Lieut-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Brittain, Sir Harry
Forrest, W.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Frece, Sir Walter de
Knox, Sir Alfred


Buckingham, Sir H.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Bullock, Captain M.
Gates, Percy
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Burman, J. B.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Goff, Sir Park
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Looker, Herbert William


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Luce, Maj. Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Greene, W. P. Crawford
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Crotrian, H. Brent
McLean, Major A


Clayton, G. C.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gunston, Captain D. W.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Craik, Rt Hon. Sir Henry
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Macquisten, F. A.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Malone, Major P. B.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Rye, F. G.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Nicholson, Col.Rt.Hon.W.G.(Ptrsf'ld.)
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)
Windsor-Clive. Lieut.-Colonel George


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Penny, Frederick George
Skelton, A. N.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Wolmer, Viscount


Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Smithers, Waldron
Womersley, W. J.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Ramsden, E.
Stanley. Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Remnant, Sir James
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Sykes, Major-Gen Sir Frederick H.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Rice, Sir Frederick
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)



Richardson, Sir P. W.(Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Tinne, J. A.
Major Hennessy and Captain Lord


Ropner, Major L.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Groves, T.
Owen, Major G.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grundy, T. W.
Paling, W.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.


Baker, Walter
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Riley, Ben


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hardie, George D,
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Barnes, A.
Harney, E. A.
Scurr, John


Barr, J.
Hayes, John Henry
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Bondfield, Margaret
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromley, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. W.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Taylor, R. A.


Cluse, W. S.
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cove, W. G.
Lansbury, George
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thurtle, Ernest


Dalton, Hugh
Lowth, T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lunn, William
Viant, S. P.


Duncan, C.
MacDonald. Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Welsh, J. C.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Fenby, T. D.
March, S.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Maxton, James
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Gosling, Harry
Montague, Frederick
Wright, W.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)



Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Naylor, T. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Oliver, George Harold
Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Allen Parkinson.

BARNET DISTRICT GAS AND WATER BILL [Lords].

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE C.

Mr. WILLIAM NICHOLSON reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee C: Sir Geoffrey Butler and Sir Charles Oman; and had appointed in substitution: Captain Brass and Captain Gunston.

Report to lie upon the Table.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That, they have agreed to,

Stornoway Harbour Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.

Amendments to,

Horticultural Produce (Sales on Commission) Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

Orders of the Day — HOUSING (RURAL WORKERS) BILL.

As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

CLAUSE 1.—(Schemes by local authorities.)

Mr. TAYLOR: I beg to move, in page 2, line 2, at the end, to insert, the words:
(a) specifying the proof to be required by the local authority of the financial inability of the owner of a dwelling-house to carry out the proposed works except he is assisted under this Act.
In moving this Amendment, I should like to stress the point that I do not see how it is possible to justify the expenditure of public money in the case of those owners of rural cottages who have sufficient resources to enable them to do the work themselves. If property of this kind, owned by people of substance who have the necessary resources to put it into a proper state of repair, has fallen into a bad state of repair, the proper remedy is not a subsidy from State funds and local rates, but the enforcement of the existing law. I am quite sure that, if the Minister of Health would insist upon the more effective carrying out of the existing provisions of the law in the rural areas, a great deal of the property which is now in a relatively bad state of disrepair would very soon be improved, and I suggest that no good reason has yet been advanced for proposing to put this burden on the ratepayer and the taxpayer.
When this matter was discussed in Committee, the right hon. Gentleman, in replying to this Amendment, suggested that he had some difficulty in arriving at what test should be employed to determine whether or not the individual owner was in a position to carry out the repairs without assistance from the State and the rates, and he asked, "What is to be the test? Is it to be the test of whether he is able to borrow money to enable him to carry out the repairs?" He rejected that test, and suggested that the test which he himself would desire to employ in this matter would be whether or not the work would be done without the
grant. It seems to me that the test which the right hon. Gentleman rejected is really the proper test to apply in a matter of this kind. If the use of public money can be defended in the case of people whose resources are very limited, that there can be no defence for the expenditure of public money in a case where the individual owner can borrow the money in order to carry out the necessary repairs, and I cannot understand why the Government resist this Amendment. I should have thought that, from the point of view of economy at any rate, a Government, which had found it necessary to attack the funds used in ministering to the well-being of sick workmen, and which had found it necessary in the name of economy to attack the position of the unemployed workman, would have been the last Government to resist an Amendment of this kind, and it comes with a particularly bad grace from the right hon. Gentleman, in view of the fact that a day or two ago he moved in this House a Resolution for the purpose of bringing about a reduction in the subsidy for the erection of new houses. The right hon. Gentleman is cutting down that expenditure on the erection of new houses, which are even more needed on the countryside than the patching up of existing dwellings. I should have thought the argument of economy would have appealed to this Government, and they would have been unable to resist an Amendment which seeks to ensure that no property shall be repaired at the public expense when the owner has the means to enable him to carry out the law.
I should like to urge a further consideration. This seems to me to be a very vicious principle with regard to housing legislation and an alteration of the existing law. In our great urban areas there is a very considerable amount of property inhabited by working-class occupiers which belongs to small owners, and which is really in a very bad state of repair. As a member of a local authority, I have had some little knowledge of the difficulties with which local authorities are faced in a strict enforcement of existing legislation designed to protect the tenants, and secure that the property is maintained in a state fit for human habitation. We continually come across cases where
property is owned by people of very limited means who are not really in a financial position to execute repairs. I do not think any Member of the House of Commons would dare to come before the House and ask that a Bill should be passed to enable those urban property owners to put their property into a proper state of repair, and I fail to see why the right hon. Gentleman should resist my Amendment, because it seems to me so very clear that as good a case can be made out for the owners of urban property as for the owners of rural property, and if he is going to give this assistance to rural property owners, and particularly to those who are in a position to repair their properties and to make them reasonably fit for human habitation, I fail to see how he could resist the same kind of treatment being given to small and needy property owners who happen to own urban property instead of rural. Therefore, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will accept this Amendment, both in the interest of economy and on the ground of the unfairness of the present proposal as between rural and urban owners. The proposal actually to impose charges upon rates and taxes to help property owned by people who are in the position to do it out of their own resources seems to me absolutely indefensible in a Government which has refused to consider a subsidy in the case of the mining industry, and which refuses to give the same facilities to property owners in the towns.

Mr. RILEY: I beg to second the Amendment.

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Neville Chamberlain): The hon. Member has argued on two assumptions, both of which I think are inaccurate. The first is, that the property, which is the subject of the operation of the Bill, is not in what he calls a proper state of repair. A proper state of repair may be a matter of opinion. If he means by that, in such a state of disrepair that it would be condemned by the local medical officer of health, that is an assumption which he has no right to make, and if the property is not in that state of disrepair, but is merely out of date and lacking something which it might properly have to-day, there is
no power by which the owner can be compelled to make the alterations that he will make when he has the facilities given him which are offered by the Bill The other assumption is that this is a Bill for the benefit of the owners of house property. The way you look at the Bill as a whole, and upon this Amendment in particular, must largely be governed by whether you are more anxious to help the agricultural worker, or to punish the owner. [HON. MEMBERS: "This is giving him something!"] It is giving the agricultural worker something. HON. MEMBERS: "And the owners!"] That is just where I differ from hon. Members opposite. There may be some remote indirect advantage to the owners 20 years hence, but no one can say that a Bill that gives only the possibility of getting 3 per cent. on such part of the money as he expends on the property himself—money for which he would have to pay 5 per cent. himself—is putting money into the pockets of the owner. What would be the result if this Amendment were accepted? How would an owner satisfy the local authorities of his financial inability to carry out the work? I ask any reasonable Member opposite to put himself in the position of an owner. Is he likely to come forward and undertake to improve his cottages if he has first to undergo an examination of this kind about his private affairs? In all probability in many cases he could not satisfy the local authority that he was financially unable, and that he could not borrow the money to carry out the alterations. The question is, how are we to persuade the owner to carry out these alterations, which are for the benefit of the man who is going to occupy the house? It is certainly contrary to the whole purpose of the Bill; indeed, it would wreck the operation of the Bill if I were to accept the Amendment, and I hope the House will reject it.

Mr. PALING: The right hon. Gentleman sets up a standard for people of his class, and for owners of property, which he is not prepared to recognise for members of the working classes. Owners of property are going to get something out of the Bill in order to make them put it into proper repair and fit for human beings to live in, and they have to have a grant out of the public purse or they will not do what is their ordinary common
duty. When we ask that they should give some proof of their need of this public money, the right hon. Gentleman says, "How can you expect owners of property to give the local authorities an account of what their finances are?" I wish you applied that standard to members of the working class when their financial need is great, but in nearly every case where a member of the working class wants help from a public authority, or from State funds, he has to give to some committee of inquiry a full description of the whole of his income, and if he does not do it, he does note get the assistance. It is one standard for members of the working class, and another for members of his own class—the property-owning class. "How could you expect members of my class to state what their finances are?" and he openly admits that in a good many cases the local council would come to the conclusion that their financial ability was such that they could afford to do it without dipping their hand into the public purse. He says, "If that be so, you would not get the houses altered." He admits, by implication, that the financial ability already exists and that because they do not desire to make the alterations they condemn these people to continue to live in houses that are practically unfit for human habitation. We are often accused of preaching class war. If we ever sit on the seats opposite, and we shall, and we are guilty of practising class war half as much as the right hon. Gentleman and his supporters, hon. Members opposite may have some reason to criticise us. When the workers ask for some-

thing, hon. Members opposite have always made the point that it will destroy the moral of the workers, their manhood, and all the rest of it, to grant their request, but no such accusation is made by hon. Members opposite when members of their own class are going to get public money. Then, they wish to avoid the question as to whether or not their class are able to find the money themselves. They must have the money if they make application for it, and that is an end of it.

This is a Bill in order to house rural workers who, to judge from the speeches of hon. Members opposite, are the flower of the countryside and so forth. According to this Bill, they are living in a state of misery and destitution, and the houses are so bad that they are not fit for habitation, in order to compel the people who are responsible for the condition of those cottages to put them into a proper condition and do their duty, the Minister of Health has to give them a bribe out of the public purse, and when we ask that some examination should be applied to them just as an examination is applied to the working classes when they ask for anything and when they apply for public assistance, the right hon. Gentleman asks, "How can you expect members of my class to give particulars?" We shall have great pleasure in going into the Lobby in support of this Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 77; Noes, 195.

Division No. 529.]
AYES.
[3.53 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Dunnico, H.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Gillett, George M.
MacNeill-Weir, L.


Ammon, Charles George
Gosling, Harry
March, S.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James


Baker, Walter
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Montague, Frederick


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Barnes, A.
Groves, T.
Naylor, T. E.


Barr, J.
Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold


Batey, Joseph
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Bondfield, Margaret
Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.


Bromley, J.
Hayes, John Henry
Riley, Ben


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Scurr, John


Cape, Thomas
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Charleton, H. C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cove, W. G.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lansbury, George
Taylor, R. A.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lunn, William
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duncan, C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Thurtle, Ernest


Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Viant, S. P.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.


Welsh, J. C.
Windsor, Walter
Charles Edwards.


Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Wright, W.



NOES.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Albery, Irving James
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arther Clive


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Gates, Percy
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ormsby-Gore, Hon, William


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Goff, Sir Park
Owen, Major G.


Apsley, Lora
Gower, Sir Robert
Penny, Frederick George


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Barrett, Major Sir Richard
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Bennett, A. J.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Ramsden, E.


Berry, Sir George
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Betterton, Henry B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Remnant, Sir James


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Rice, Sir Frederick


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hammersley, S. S.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Brass, Captain W.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Ropner, Major L.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Haslam, Henry C.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Briant, Frank
Hawke, John Anthony
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Briggs, J. Harold
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Rye, F. G.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'i'd., Hexham)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustav D


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hills, Major John Waller
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Bullock, Captain M.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Burman, J. B.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Skelton, A. N.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kine'dine, C.)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Smithers, Waldron


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumb'l'nd, Whiteh'n)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hunting field, Lord
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hurd, Percy A.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Clayton, G. C.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Cope, Major William
Jacob, A. E.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Tinne, J. A.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Davies, sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Knox, Sir Alfred
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Davison, Sir W, H. (Kensington, S.)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Dixey, A. C.
Looker, Herbert William
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Drewe, C.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Wells, S. R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Windsor- Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Elveden, Viscount
McLean, Major A.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Wise, Sir Fredric


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
McNeill, Rt. Hon Ronald John
Wolmer, Viscount


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Macquisten, F. A.
Womersley, W, J.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Malone, Major P. B.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Fenby, T. D.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Forrest, W.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)



Fraser, Captain Ian
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Frece, Sir Walter de
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Captain Viscount Curzon and




Captain Lord Stanley.

CLAUSE 2.—(Power of local authorities to snake grants or loans.)

Mr. VIANT: I beg to move, in page 2, to leave out from the word "given" in line 19 to the word "by" in line 21.

The Amendment will make the Clause read:
Assistance under this Act may be given by way of loan.

The Amendment has been put down for a definite purpose. Those of us who are
associated with it feel that the money which is advanced under this Act should be advanced by way of loan and not as a gift. The subsidy has been reduced for general houses, and the same logic should be applied in relation to this Bill. The agricultural community, principally landowners and property owners in the rural areas, have already had sufficient gifts by way of abatements and such like under other Acts, and they ought to be prepared to put their property in repair and to pay back to the State any assistance which may be given to them under this Act. I hope that the Minister in charge of the Bill will not argue that in many instances, unless money be given for this purpose, the property will not be put into repair, because the power already exists, and should be exercised, to compel owners of such property to put it into repair. We feel that if the State is prepared to come to the aid of these property owners, they ought at least to be prepared to pay the money back to the State, and the Amendment has been put down with that object in view. I hope that the House will be prepared to support it.

Mr. RILEY: I beg to second the Amendment.
I do so for the same reason which has been mentioned by my hon. Friend. Although possibly some case may be made out for advancing loans to owners of property who, even although comparatively well-to-do, may not be in a position to find definite money to put their property in repair, but may be in a position later on to repay any loan which may be advanced.

Captain WALTER SHAW: On a point of Order. Constant reference has been made to "repair." I do not see that word in the Bill.

Mr. RILEY: Yes, I withdraw the word "repair" and substitute "reconditioning" or "alterations in construction." It undoubtedly is a misdescription to use the word "repair"; it is understood that the grants under this Bill may not be used for ordinary repair. They are intended for alterations in structure and for reconditioning. Probably, all will agree that there is something to be said for advancing loans, but there is no justification, I think, for making grants
from public funds to improve the property of people who may be in a perfectly good position themselves to fulfil their obligations. In an earlier discussion on the Bill the right hon. Gentleman argued that the people who are going to have the benefit of these grants or loans are not going to gain any substantial return. I want to remind the House that the Clause as it stands refers not only to existing dwelling-houses but also to buildings which are not now being used as dwelling-houses. Therefore, the grants will apply to buildings which may not at present be in use and may not be bringing in the owner any return whatever. They may be lying entirely unused and practically of no economic value whatever.
The Clause as it stands provides for grants being made to owners of such buildings as well as of houses, and it may mean that quite well-to-do owners, substantial landowners and large farmers, with buildings which they more or less regard as being used up, for which at the moment they have no, or little, use, and which have no economic value may be eligible, if the local authority approve, for these public grants. You may have such a building at present bringing no return whatever to the owner. It is not let, and it is not used as a house. Under this Bill he may have a grant to put it into condition for use as a house, and then he may receive, not as the Parliamentary Secretary said 3 per cent. upon his portion of the expenditure on reconditioning, but something like 20 per cent. I ought to try and make that point clear. The owner of such a building transformed into a house under this Bill will be entitled to get the normal average rent paid by agricultural labourers in that district. That is the definition in the Act. I believe Clause 5 defines the rent.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): No, Clause 3, Subsection (1).

Mr. RILEY: Yes, the normal agricultural rent is defined as follows:
(i) in the case of a dwelling which had not previously to the execution of the works been, or which was not within the period of five years immediately preceding the execution of the works separately let as such, the rent which the local authority determine to be the average rent for the time being paid by agricultural workers in the district;
That is the definition. Now let us take actual cases. Supposing, to put it at a moderate figure, the average rent paid by agricultural labourers in the district is 2s. per week. The owner of such a building, for an expenditure of £50, his portion of the total expenditure of £150 to recondition that building, can draw 10 per cent. on his outlay. If the average rent is 3s. per week, he draws 15 per cent. on £50, and if, as in some cases, it is 4s., he is entitled to 20 per cent. on his expenditure of £50. I submit that such interest is entirely unjustified. There is something to be said for advancing loans which are going to be repaid to people who are quite well-to-do but who cannot find the immediate capital necessary, but there is no justification for advancing from the public purse grants which would work out in this way.

Sir K. WOOD: This Amendment, of course, would cut right across one of the principal features of the Bill and one which, I believe, will bring perhaps the greatest benefit to the agricultural workers of the country. If this Amendment were carried, the Bill would simply make provision for assistance by way of loan. I should like to say, in order that the matter may be perfectly clear and especially as the word "repair" has been used both in Committee and again to-day, that the work in respect of which the grant is to be given is in relation to reconditioning and reconstruction. If the House will look at page 2 of the Bill, they will see there specified the nature of the work contemplated. It
may consist of structural alteration, repair, addition, provision of water supply, drainage, or sanitary conveniences, or other like works, but shall not in any case include works of ordinary repair or upkeep, except in so far as they are incidental to or connected with any such works as aforesaid.
It is perfectly clear that the grant is to be given for that kind of work specified in that particular sub-section. It is to enable owners to make such additions to their property, including the provision of water supply, drainage or sanitary conveniences, as will make the dwelling habitable that it is proposed these grants or loans should be given. Clause 3, which really answers the statement which the hon. Member has made, lays down very strict conditions under which grants can be given.
The dwelling shall not be occupied except by a person, whether as owner or tenant, whose income is, in the opinion of the local authority, such that he would not ordinarily pay a rent in excess of that paid by agricultural workers in the district, or by an agricultural worker or employé of substantially the same economic condition employed by the person who is rated in respect of the dwelling;
The rent payable by the occupier in respect of the dwelling shall not exceed the amount of the normal agricultural rent, increased by a sum equal to three per cent. of the amount by which the estimated cost of the works in respect of which assistance has been given exceeds the amount of the assistance given by way of grant, and no fine, premium, or other like sum shall be taken in addition to the rent;
How hon. Members can say that is a gift to the landlord I am Personally unable to follow. If an owner were unable to obtain a grant given by the State, he would probably either have to sell some security which brings him in more than 3 per cent. or borrow money and pay it back at a higher rate than 3 per cent. Hon. Members at every stage of this Bill seem to be seeking to make out that there is some benefit which they have not yet been able to discover so far as the landlord is concerned. It runs right through the Bill that the benefit which these grants will give, and the contribution of the landlord, will go mainly, indeed almost solely, to the agricultural workers of the country, and to suggest that this provision of a grant should be omitted from the Bill will destroy one of the most valuable features of the Measure.

Mr. BARR: May I point out that if we accept the Amendment we free ourselves from any risk that the landlord should benefit at all; and that seems to be the desire of the Minister, This would be a most effective way of ensuring that the landlord does not benefit. I was a member of the Royal Commission en Housing in Scotland. That Commission was composed largely of members who share the views of hon. Members opposite, and they issued a solemn warning against grants of this kind passing into the pockets of landowners. I will only trouble the House with one or two quotations. In their warning against a direct subsidy to employers, landowners and speculative builders, they said this about grants:
The difficulties and risks attending such subsidies require careful consideration.
Subsidies of this nature would mean that the builder would be using the State resources to enable him to make a profit on the small share of capital supplied by him.
In this way we should be relieving owners of duties which have been recognised as theirs from time immemorial—namely, that they should keep their property in proper repair. [An HON. MEMBER: "Not repair!"] Let me take up that interruption. I think the Lord Advocate will agree with me that the legal position is that a landowner is responsible for providing the workman's cottage and all works of construction, and that the tenant is responsible for keeping the cottage in proper repair. So much is that so that the Scottish Board of Health in their last Report said that it had not been possible for local authorities to take up the work of providing new houses for farm servants at all, and they gave reasons why. The first reason was that the Housing Acts did not apply, because the burden lay on the owner of the property and not on the local authority. In the second place, they said that farm servants were moving about from place to place so much that it was not possible for local authorities to build houses and put in those whom they could regard as permanent tenants, because these farm servants were flitting about from place to place. Under the Act of 1924, which

gives special facilities for the erection of houses in rural areas, the grant is £12 10s. instead of £9. They said this Act was not applicable because it applied only to houses that are let; these houses are not let but are part of the ordinary payment given to farm servants.

Therefore, if we give a grant for this purpose, we are reheving the landowner of a duty which has been recognised as his from time immemorial. The Minister of Health tried to make out that there was no real benefit at all so far as the landowner is concerned, but, surely, it is a great benefit to have you house reconditioned by a Government and local grant which will cover two-thirds of the whole outlay. The Government themselves realise that there is a benefit going to the landowner, as they have put in certain precautions. He cannot take advantage of it for 20 years; he cannot charge snore than 3 per cent. on the estimated cost of the works, although it may mean much more than a 3 per cent. return to him on the portion of the sooner he has to find. For these reasons I support the Amendment. I think it should be confined to a loan. I do not think we should give a State grant for such purposes as this.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 208; Noes, 78.

Division No. 530.]
AYES.
[4.22 p.m.


Agg Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Albery, Irving James
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fanshawe, Commander G. D


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)
Fenby, T. D.


Apsley, Lord
Cazalet, Captain victor A.
Fielden, E. B.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon Stanley
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Forrest, W.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Foster, Sir Henry S.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Clayton, G. C.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fraser, Captain Ian


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Cochrane, Commander Hon, A. D.
Frece, Sir Walter de


Bennett, A. J.
Cope, Major William
Ganzoni, Sir John


Berry, Sir George
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.


Betterton, Henry B.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Gates, Percy


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Goff, Sir Park


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Gower, Sir Robert


Bowyer. Capt. G. E. W.
Davies, Sir Thorn s (Cirencester)
Grant, Sir J. A.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major Sir A. B.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Brats, Captain W.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Dawson, Sir Philip
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Briant, Frank
Dixey, A. C.
Grotrian, H. Brent


Briggs, J. Harold
Drewe, C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'i'd., Hexham)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Elveden, Viscount.
Hammersley, S. S.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Erskine Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Bullock, Captain M.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Haslam, Henry C.


Burman, J. B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hawke, John Anthony


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Headlam, Lieut-Colonel C. M.


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Smithers, Waldron


Hermessy Major J. R. G.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden. E)


Hills, Major John Walter
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Nield Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Oakley, T.
Tinne, J. A.


Huntingfield, Lord
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Hurd, Percy A.
Owen, Major G.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hurst, Gerald B.
Penny, Frederick George
Turton, sir Edmund Russborough


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bi's)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Jacob, A, E.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Warrender, Sir Victor


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Raine, W.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Ramsden, E.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Wells, S. R.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Remnant, Sir James
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Rentoul, G. S.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Locker-Lampson. G. (Wood Green)
Rice, Sir Frederick
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'tn)
Richardson, sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Loder, J. de V.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Looker, Herbert William
Ropner, Major L.
Wolmer, Viscount


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Rugglee-Brise, Major E. A.
Womersley, W. J.


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Rye, F. G.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


McLean, Major A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Macmillan, Captain H.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Macquisten, F. A.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)



Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Malone, Major P. B.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Margesson, Captain D.
Skelton, A. N.
Lord Stanley.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Potts, John S.


Adamson, W. M. (Stall., Cannock)
Groves, T.
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Grundy, T. W.
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hardie, George D.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barnes, A.
Hayes, John Henry
Smith, Ben (Bermondssy, Rotherhithe)


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bondfield, Margaret
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Bromley, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Taylor, R. A.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cape, Thomas
Kennedy, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Charleton, H. C.
Lowth, T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Cluse, W. S.
Lunn, William
Viant, S. P.


Cove, W. G.
MacDonald. Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Welsh, J. C.


Dalton, Hugh
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
March, S.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Day, Colonel Harry
Maxton, James
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Duncan, C.
Montague, Frederick
Windsor, Walter


Dunnico, H.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wright, W


Gillett, George M.
Naylor, T. E.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gosling, Harry
Oliver, George Harold



Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.




Allen Parkinson,

Mr. RYE: I beg to move, in page 2, line 26, at the end, to insert the words
() where a building divided up into two or more separate dwellings exceeds such sum of four hundred pounds multiplied by the number of separate dwellings as aforesaid.
I move this Amendment because there is no definition in the Bill of the word
"dwelling." I am afraid that without such a definition a certain type of house may not come within the provisions of the Bill. The house to which I refer is the old class of big building, frequently found in the country, that has fallen from its high estate and has been divided in the past into a series of separate tene-
ments. Such a, building would obviously be, whether improved or not, in excess of the value of £400 imposed by the Bill. I have, therefore, moved the Amendment to make it clear beyond all shadow of doubt that that type of old house, altered as I have stated, would come within the provisions of the Bill. The matter was brought before the Standing Committee in the form in which it is now moved, but the Minister was unable to agree with my view, and he was fortified by the Lord Advocate, who took the point that by virtue of Clause 1 and the words "houses or buildings" therein, and by virtue of Clause 2, Sub-section (3), there can he no possible question on the subject. But with all possible respect to the Lord Advocate, I suggest that the matter is not free from doubt. I suggest that it would be advisable to put the position beyond doubt by including the words of the Amendment. If not, as has so often happened in the past, the matter may have to come before the Law Courts for decision.
I know that the Minister considers that the words of the Amendment are superfluous. His view is that the Amendment would overload the Bill. But I have no doubt that in the past the Minister has expressed the same view regarding other Bills, and I have not the least doubt that the Parliamentary Secretary has expressed the same view, and that they have both been supported by the Law Officers of the Crown. But that does not alter the fact that in many instances, and notably in connection with the Rent Restriction Acts, questions such as these have had to come before the Courts, with great expense to the litigants. I hope, therefore, that we shall make the point clear once and for all, beyond any possible shadow of doubt. Assuming that I am wrong in my view, there cannot be any harm in inserting these words, but if, on the other hand, I am right, we shall be avoiding litigation and unnecessary cost.

Sir HENRY CAUTLEY: I beg to second the Amendment.
I think it is extremely desirable that there should be no possibility of litigation to decide this point, and that it should be decided now.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot help thinking that my hon. and learned Friend who seconded the Amendment was sanguine in thinking that it was possible so to draft a Bill that no litigation could be undertaken afterwards in respect of it. Although I have given further consideration to the Amendment since the Committee stage, I still remain of the same opinion, not only that the Amendment is unnecessary, but that it would make confusion worse confounded. The Amendment does not read properly. It says that no assistance under this Bill shall be given "where a building divided up into two or more separate dwellings exceeds such sum of four hundred pounds multiplied by the number of separate dwellings as aforesaid." I suggest that he means the value of the building, but what he says is the value of the dwelling. If the Amendment were accepted as it stands, it would bring about the opposite of what my hon. Friend intends. There cannot be any possible doubt about this matter. The Bill is a Bill for converting houses or buildings into dwellings, and I do not see that we effect anything by taking the particular case of a house or building which is already divided into dwellings, and dealing with that, because the test we have to apply is, how many dwellings will the house consist of when it is improved, and in respect of each of those dwellings this limit of £400 will apply. My hon. Friend says there is no definition of "dwellings" in the Bill. Dwelling is not a new term. It is an old term, and I suggest that to put in a new definition of an old term is to invite litigation and not to prevent it.

Mr. RYE: I still think that there is a doubt about the matter, but in view of what the Minister has said, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. RYE: I beg to move, in page 2, line 26, after the word "pounds" to insert the words
Provided that, in arriving at the value of any dwelling any carving or panelling shall not be taken into account.
In some old cottages there is to be found carving or panelling or both. That might bring the total value over £400, and that is not the intention of the Bill.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am prepared to accept the Amendment.

Mr. CHARLETON: I see a very great danger in this Amendment. It will have the effect of getting two valuations of property, one a value after the effective repairs, and the other the selling value. A dwelling might have some carving or panelling on which the owner might put a quite artificial value, but in space and accommodation the dwelling might give only the equal of surrounding buildings. When later on the owner wanted to sell the property he would say, "It is quite true that it has only a certain space and

accommodation, but in addition there are some frescoes which have been covered with whitewash, and we have discovered that there are some balusters up the staircase which were carved in the time of Queen Anne." These are of no value to the house as a dwelling, but they might give the owner an opportunity of violating the conditions under which the State helps to repair the building and to put it into habitable condition. I therefore oppose the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The house divided: Ayes, 197; Noes, 84.

Division No. 531.]
AYES.
[4.40 p.m.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Erskine, James Malcolm Montelth
Looker, Herbert William


Albery, Irving James
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Mac Andrew, Major Charles Glen


Apsley, Lord
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
McLean, Major A.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Fielden, E. B.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Barclay-Harvey C. M.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Forrest, W.
Macquisten, F. A.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Fester, Sir Harry S.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Beckett, sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Berry, Sir George
Fraser, Captain Ian
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Bethel, A.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Malone, Major P. B.


Betterton, Henry B.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Margesson, Captain D.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gates, Percy
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Meyer, Sir Frank


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Goff, Sir Park
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Gower, sir Robert
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Brass, Captain W.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Briggs, J. Harold
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut-Col. J. T. C.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'i'd., Hexham)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Oakley, T.


Bullock, Captain M.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William


Burman, J. B.
Haslam, Henry C.
Penny, Frederick George


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hawke, John Anthony
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Raine, W.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Hills, Major John Waller
Ramsden, E.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Remnant, Sir James


Clayton, G. C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Rentoul, G. S.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hudson, Capt. A, U. M. (Hackney. N.)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cochrane, Commander Hon, A. D.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Rice, Sir Frederick


Cope, Major William
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Huntingfield, Lord
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hurd, Percy A.
Ropner, Major L.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hurst, Gerald B.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rye, F. G.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Davison. Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Jacob, A. E.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Dawson, Sir Philip
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Dixey, A. C.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustava D.


Drewe, C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Knox, Sir Alfred
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Skelton, A. N.


Elveden, Viscount
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)
Smithers, Waldron


Sprot, Sir Alexander
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Wolmer, Viscount


Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W
Womersley, W. J.


Stanley. Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Warrender, Sir Victor
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Wells, S. R.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Thomston, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Tinne, J. A.
Winby, Colonel L. P.



Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Tryon, Rt Hon. George Clement
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Major Hennessy and Captain Lord


Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough
wise, Sir Fredric
Stanley.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.


Adamson, w. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Groves, T.
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Grundy, T. W.
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Button)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Morthyr Tydvil)
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Sinclair, Major sir A. (Caithness)


Barnes, A.
Hardie, George D.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hayes, John Henry
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bondfield, Margaret
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Briant, Frank
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. W.


Bromley, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Taylor, R. A.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cape, Thomas
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Cluse, W. S.
Lee, F.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Cove, W. G.
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities!
Lunn, William
Welsh, J. C.


Dalton, Hugh
Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Day, Colonel Harry
March, S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Duncan, C.
Maxton, James
Windsor, Walter


Dunnico, H.
Montague, Frederick
Wright, W


Fenby, T, D.
Naylor, T. E.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gillett, George M.
Oliver, George Harold



Gosling, Harry
Paling, W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.




Allen Parkinson.

Sir K. WOOD: I beg to move, in page 3, line 6, to leave out the word "forty," and to insert instead thereof the word "thirty."
This Amendment proposes to change from forty years to thirty years the period of the unexpired leasehold interest required to be held by an applicant who is a leaseholder. As we are making another arrangement in so far as the charge is concerned, the length of this period is not now a matter of great importance, and I think the House will agree that in all the circumstances 30 years is a reasonable period.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: I oppose the Amendment. I thoroughly object to the principle of this Bill because by it the ratepayers and the national Exchequer are being compelled to provide money to put in a decent state for habitation certain property the owners of which have refused to put it into proper condition. Taking this Amendment and looking forward to the end of a period of 30 years we must remember that if £100 has been taken from the ratepayers and taxpayers
to put a single house into a decent state of habitation, the full value of that grant will he handed over to the owner of the property at the termination of the lease. A period of 30 years may be regarded by the hon. Gentleman as reasonable, but I think the Clause as it stands at present, with the term of 40 years specified in it, is giving the property owner much more than he is entitled to in increased value resulting from sums of money taken from the rates and from the Exchequer. The whole Bill is a standing condemnation of the owners of this kind of property. They have refused to make their property reasonably fit for human habitation and have forced the Minister to provide money from national and local sources in order to do what they themselves ought to have been compelled to do, long since. To make it possible, at the termination of this period, for the property owner to secure the financial benefits accruing from this Bill is an utterly wrong and anti-social proposal to which we should not agree.

Mr. A. GREENWOOD: When this matter was under discussion at a previous stage the Parliamentary Secretary said the object of this particular provision was to secure that, where the applicant was a leaseholder, he should have a substantial interest in the building. The hon. Gentleman explained that this period had been fixed as a reasonable period. That was the hon. Gentleman's considered view then; but after two short speeches from two hon. Members who wished to reduce the period to 30 years and 25 years respectively, the hon. Gentleman's view became elastic. The term "reasonable" is an elastic term, and after those two speeches, the Parliamentary Secretary, who had previously arrived at the conclusion that 40 years would be a reasonable period,

said he was disposed to make it 30 years. The Amendment is a distinct weakening of the Bill. No doubt had hon. Members opposite known that the Government were prepared to give way on this matter they would have tried to convince the somewhat elastic mind of the Parliamentary Secretary that 20 years or 15 years or even five years would be a reasonable period. This Amendment which has been accepted by the Government weakens the Bill and makes it still further a landlords' Bill; and we have no alternative but to force the Amendment to a division.

Question put, "That the word 'forty' stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 77; Noes, 198.

Division No. 532.]
AYES.
[4.53 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Groves, T.
Potts, John S.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grundy, T. W.
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hardie, George D.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barnes, A.
Hayes, John Henry
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bondfield, Margaret
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Bromley, J.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, James (Ayr and Butt)
Jones, T. I, Mardy (Pontypridd)
Taylor, R. A.


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Kelly, W. T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cape, Thomas
Kennedy, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Charleton, H. C.
Lee, F.
Viant, S. P.


Cluse, W. S.
Lowth, T.
Welsh, J. C.


Cove, W. G.
Lunn, William
Wheatley. Rt. Hon. J.


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
March, S.
Wilton, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Day, Colonel Harry
Maxton, James
Windsor, Walter


Duncan, C.
Montague, Frederick
Wright, W.


Dunnico, H.
Morrison. R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gillett, George M.
Naylor, T. E.



Gosling, Harry
Oliver, George Harold
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Charles Edwards.


NOES.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Dawson, Sir Philip


Albery, Irving James
Buckingham, Sir H.
Dixey, A. C.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Drewe, C.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Bullock, Captain M.
Eden, Captain Anthony


Apsley, Lord
Burman, J. B.
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Elveden, Viscount


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, woston-s-M.)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Bennett, A. J.
Chamberlain. Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Berry, Sir George
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Bethel, A.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Betterton, Henry B.
Clayton, G. C.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cobb. Sir Cyril
Fenby, T. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Fielden, E. B.


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Cope, Major William
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Forrest, W.


Brass, Captain W.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Briant, Frank
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Frece, Sir Walter de


Briggs, J. Harold
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Ganzoni, Sir John


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Gates, Percy


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'i'd., Hexham)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Goff, Sir Park
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Gower, Sir Robert
McLean, Major A.
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Grant, Sir J. A.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Greene, w. P. Crawford
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Grotrian, H. Brent
Macquisten, F. A.
Skelton, A. N.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Smith, A. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Smithers, Waldron


Hall, Capt. w. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Malone, Major P. B.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Margesson, Captain D.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Haslam, Henry C.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hawke, John Anthony
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Tinne, J. A.


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Moore Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Hills, Major John Waller
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Hogg. Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Ward. Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Oakley, T.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Owen, Major G.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hume-Williams, sir W. Ellis
Penny, Frederick George
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Huntingfield, Lord
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wells, S. R.


Hurd, Percy A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hunt, Gerald A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Raine, W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Ramsden, E.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Jacob, A. E.
Remnant, Sir James
Wise, Sir Fredric


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Rentoul, G. S.
Wolmer, Viscount


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Womersley, W. J.


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Rice. Sir Frederick
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Knox, Sir Alfred
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Ropner, Major L.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Looker, Herbert William
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Rye, F. G



Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Captain Lord Stanley and Captain




Viscount Curzon

Word "thirty" there inserted in the Bill.

Mr. CHARLES EDWARDS: I beg to move, in page 3, line 11, at the end, to insert the words
(and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision)—

(i) will contain a bathroom with a fixed bath;
(ii) will as respects the walls or other partitions of the rooms used or intended to he used as bedrooms comply with the requirements of decency."
5.0 P.M.
I think this is a reasonable Amendment, and one which the Minister should accept. We are only asking for the common conditions of decency to he applied to these houses in regard to which public funds are used. We might not have had so much to say had the owners been doing these repairs on their own, but when public money is to be used, then at least common conveniences and common decencies should be provided in these houses. We may be told that we should trust to the local authorities to see that this is done. If the local authorities
were only these in time industrial parts, I would feel more comfortable about the matter, but often the very person who will receive grants under this Bill will be the very man who will dominate these Councils. In those cases, we want to make it quite clear that these ordinary conveniences of life shall be put into any house, and that no house shall be built without a bath, and that. there shall be no alterations where public money is used within enforcing the provisions of this Amendment. All sorts of difficulties are put in the way in regard to the water supply, but if people bathe at all they must use water, and it is quite as easy to put the water in a bath as it is in a bath in an outhouse. We are getting tired of this class war that is being forced upon us. If hon. Members will read this Clause, they will see what I mean. It says that the local authorities shall be satisfied
that the dwelling will after the completion of the works be in all respects fit for habitation as a dwelling by persons of the working classes.
I would like hon. Members to note the words "by persons of the working classes." Nobody else. But is not "a person of the working classes" entitled to the ordinary conveniences of life? We are not asking for anything extra-ordinary; we are not asking for luxuries. We are asking simply for the ordinary conveniences, and I think it is time that the people who framed these Clauses ought to find some other way without bringing in this class distinction every time, and talking about making a dwelling fit "for persons of the working classes." But is not a person "of the working classes" entitled to a house which is just as good as anybody else's?

Sir H. CAUTLEY: Some of these houses have no water supply laid on.

Mr. EDWARDS: If there is no water supply, the people cannot live there.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: Of course they can.

Mr. EDWARDS: There must be a water supply before they can live there. There may be water in a well, or the inhabitants may get their water from a brook. There are plenty of places where you may not have a hot water system, but you can have water at the top of the house, and if there is a well you can have water in the house. This Amendment, I repeat, is a simple request for the ordinary conveniences of to-day's requirements.

Mr. MARDY JONES: I beg to second the Amendment.
Like my hon. Friend, I hope the Government at this time of day will come forward handsomely and say that they will accept this Amendment, because they have been proclaiming in this House and in the country for some time past that they have provided a large number of houses under the Acts of 1923 and 1924. We are all very pleased at that, but I would point out that in both those Acts there is the definite provision that a bath-room with a fixed bath must be provided. Of course, in districts where there is not an adequate water supply, a certain amount of latitude will be allowed in that direction and that is the chief argument that will no doubt be raised this evening against this Amendment. But I think that it is not a substantial argument, because everyone will admit that if the water can be provided at all, it is desirable that there should
be a bath-room and a fixed bath. I understand that we are all agreed that that is desirable, and where there is a will there is a way. There is no rural district in this country where sufficient water cannot be provided by local effort and ingenuity to justify the existence of a bath-room with a fixed bath in every rural cottage. I have a large rural district in my own Division, and I know the water supply there is as difficult as it is in most rural parts, but I have discovered, when I have visited some of the local squires houses and the houses ct the vicars and parsons that they have got bath-rooms with fixed baths, and a water supply. What is good enough for the squire and parson is good enough for the agricultural labourer or any other dweller in rural districts, and a way could be provided. This country has an excellent water supply, and the climate is such that there is no excuse for the lack of water, either from rain water from the roof or from a well. There is not a single rural area in the country where, if provision is made by the local authority, an adequate supply cannot be had for this first human need of cleanliness, which, we are told, is next to godliness, but that is very far from the Tory policy in this Bill. I hope they will not stress the difficulty too far. I have had occasion to report to the Minister of Health a number of instances where full advantage has not been taken of the local water supply for drainage and sanitary purposes, even apart from the question of fixed baths with the water supplied, and I hope no difficulties will be put in the way of this Amendment.
I want to draw the attention of the House to the Preamble of the Bill, which states that the object of the Bill is to
promote the provision of housing accommodation for agricultural workers and for persons whose economic condition is substantially the same as that of such workers.
Surely that would include miners, as well as many other workers who live in rural districts. I regret to say that, as a result of the wage agreements now foisted upon miners in this country, an increasing number of miners will now be placed in the same economic position as the agricultural workers on the rural edges of the coalfields. A large number of mine-workers necessarily live in those rural areas, and if anyone requires a daily bath surely it is
the miner, and unless we extend the provisions of this Bill to make it compulsory to provide a bath fixed in a bathroom many of the workers in the same economic position as the agricultural workers and other rural workers will be deprived of that daily necessity.
Then I would like the House to consider the question of the walls or substantial partitions. That is very important. I observe that under this Bill public moneys may be utilised to assist property owners to improve their existing houses and dwellings up to a maximum of £400. Last week the Minister of Health and his Deputy made a great point of the fact that they wanted to reduce the subsidy, especially on the ground that by reducing the subsidy it would be possible to reduce the cost of building houses in the future. If there was any ground for that argument—and it certainly weighed with the majority of the House, because they obeyed the party Whip—surely if a house is to be worth £400 in a country district the cost is sufficient to permit of a bathroom with a fixed bath being provided for these people. I hope the Minister will not depart from the now admitted housing policy of all parties in this country, that a bathroom with a fixed bath is desirable and should be available for every dweller in the land, whether they be in town, city, urban or rural districts. It is a pretence that an adequate water supply is not available, and it is a pretence which does not redound to the credit of a Ministry which prides itself upon its care for public sanitation.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: This Amendment and the speeches by which it has been supported show some confusion of thought, because they dwelt upon the strange analogy between the provision of baths in new houses and the provision of baths and bathrooms in old houses which were to be put under alterations. The Act of 1923 provided that every house which received assistance under that Act should be fitted with a fixed bath. It did not say in a bath-room and the reason it did not say in a bath-room was because it was recognised then that there would be cases when the provision of a bathroom would mean such a reduction in the space of other rooms as really to be an undesirable condition to be imposed. It
is true that by the Act of 1924 the words "in a bath-room" were made to apply to the 1923 houses as well as to houses built under the Act of 1924, but in both those cases a discretion was given to the Minister, and that discretion has been used and no doubt will be used again. In this Amendment hon. Members opposite are not giving to the Minister the discretion which was allowed in the 1923 and 1924 Acts in regard to new houses. It must be perfectly obvious that if there was difficulty with regard to new houses, there will be much more difficulty as regards old ones. I would remind the House that under the Bill we are now discussing the total amount of subsidy which can be given in respect of any house is £100. If, however, the total cost of any alterations exceeds £150, the whole of the extra will have to come out of the owner's pocket.

Mr. PALING: Shame!

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: It is not a question of whether it is a shame or not. I want to examine what is likely to be the effect of the Amendment proposed, and I would point out that there is no obligation on anybody to take advantage of this Bill if the conditions are such as to make it disadvantageous to them to do so. If you are going to say that no assistance shall be given to any alterations to houses or buildings unless those alterations include the provision of a fixed bath in a bathroom, then one of two things will happen. Either you will have a large number of proposals scrapped because the owners will not undertake the additional expense, or, in order to keep within the maximum sum of £150, the provision of a fixed bath in a bathroom will be made at the expense of some other alteration or improvement. There are also many cases in the country where the water supplies are not laid on to the houses, and where they are not available, and I have not the slightest doubt that in some of those cases it might be better to spend money in making other improvements, which would provide houses with some further decorations or, perhaps, larger rooms, rather than to put in a bathroom for a bath for which there is no water.
In these circumstances, I think I am justified in saying that there really is a confusion of thought on this question in considering the provision of bathrooms
under this Bill as being analogous to the provision of bathrooms in entirely new houses. There is no obligation upon anybody to take advantage of this Bill. My own anxiety all through has been lest owners should feel that it was not worth their while to work under the Bill, and I should be very sorry to accept an Amendment which throws upon owners, who might otherwise be disposed to improve their cottages, an obligation which they would regard not merely as onerous, but in many cases as unreasonable, and which might, therefore, prevent them carrying out any improvements at all. I would remind the House once more that there is nothing to prevent an owner putting in a bath and a bathroom where it can be conveniently and advantageously done, and I hope that in many cases it will be done, but to think, as hon. Members opposite do think, that you can compel them to put in a bathroom by inserting this Amendment in the Bill, is a complete misapprehension of the scope of the Bill.

Mr. MARDY JONES: The Minister has expressed an objection more to a bathroom than to a fixed bath. We are prepared to meet him by deleting the requirement to provide a bathroom, but retaining the provision of a fixed bath. Surely the cost of a fixed bath, apart from a separate bathroom, would not be so serious, and, as Minister of Health, the right hon. Gentleman must agree that a fixed bath should be available in every house, whether in the country or in the town.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: No, I am not prepared to accept even that suggestion, for the reasons which I have already given. I think it is more likely that a fixed bath will be provided than a bath in a bathroom, and, of course, the provision of a fixed bath I should consider to rank among those things for which assistance could be given, but I am not prepared to insist that in every case a fixed bath should be put in, because there are cases where even the provision of a bath alone would not be worth the money which would have to be spent upon it.

Mr. JONES: The Minister might make a statement something upon those lines in the Memorandum which he will issue to the local authorities later on, as an expression of opinion on the part of the
Ministry that it is desirable that that should be done.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I will certainly consider that suggestion, but it must be remembered that my Circular will not be to owners, but to local authorities. However, I am quite prepared to consider that suggestion.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: I wish to support the Amendment, and to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that there is not quite as much confusion of thought on these benches as he would imply. He suggests that the confusion exists as a result of the 1923 and 1924 Acts, under which the new concrete houses are being built, and that we seem to forget that in those cases we are dealing, not with an absolutely new house, but with an older house, for which there is a limit to the amount of money that can be expended to put it into a reasonable state of habitation. The right hon. Gentleman must know that if the owner of the property is not willing, of his own free will, to keep his property fit for human habitation without coming to Parliament and securing a grant of £100, there is not much likelihood of the owner in those circumstances, of his own free will, supplying any one of his tenants with a bath, either in a special bathroom or in any other portion of the house, so that I think the confusion is rather on the Front Bench opposite than on this side.
The Bill sets out to do a particular thing, namely, to put houses in rural areas into a reasonable state of repair and fit for habitation, and to do this the Government provide a sum of money, which the ratepayers supplement with a similar sum. That indicates that the property owner, for some reason or other, has not kept his property up to a proper standard, so that there is very little hope that an owner, of his own free will, is going to provide the rural worker with a bath for a very long time. The right hon. Gentleman says that if you insist upon the owner including a bath, with or without a bathroom, he is not likely to carry out any sort of repairs, even under this Bill. I suggest that since the ratepayers and the Government are to provide £100 and the owner of the property £50, that ought to be a real invitation and inspiration to the owner to make his houses what they ought to be and to last for a very long time, and it seems to me that neither the
financial doubt of the Minister nor the fear that the owners will not take advantage of this Bill is very well-founded. I think the Government should accept the Amendment, if only to make a stand in improving, in a very real and definite way, the standard of housing accommodation in our rural areas. There is not an hon. Member opposite, whether he lives in a rural area or in a town, who does not enjoy the luxury of a bathroom, and how can they vote against the provision of a bath for a rural worker When they know that they are giving the owner of the property £100 to put the property in a decent state of habitation?
As to the argument that a water supply might not be available, there are many rural areas where the water supply could and would have been obtained had it not been for the fact that so many rural property owners are also members of the rural councils, not for the purpose of making provision for anything, but to see that no money is spent. They are rate savers or rate preservers, and, as a result, many rural areas have neither the water supply nor the sanitation that they ought to have, because of these owners of property. I suggest that the Minister might very well have accepted this Amendment and let it be understood by the property owners that he feels that, just as he can enjoy a bath himself, so the rural worker ought to be permitted that privilege in his own home, and if the Government and the ratepayers are giving £100, it ought to be an absolute instruction to every person who is going to have his property improved to that extent, at somebody else's expense, to insist upon a bath, either in a special bathroom or at least a fixed bath in some part of the house, so that every member of the family can enjoy that luxury. A water supply would follow the provision of a bath, and it is the Minister of Health who can either lead the way to an upward movement, so far as rural housing accommodation is concerned, or, as be has done in the past, stand as a barrier to any such progress. I hope he will change to-day and get rid of a good deal of that confusion from which he is suffering, instead of charging us here with confusion of thought.

Major DAVIES: It: is most unfortunate that the House should be plunged into this bath warfare, particularly when many of us have been through all this discussion in the Committee upstairs. It seems to me that the first paragraph in this Amendment is the Lido paragraph and the second the keyhole paragraph, and, as far as the second is concerned, it is already covered in the Bill by directions to local authorities that they cannot give approval to this work unless it conforms to the requirements of decency. With regard to the bath question, I think it came as a surprise to some hon. Members opposite in the Standing Committee to realise that occasioNally in the country we are up against a situation where cottages have been built where there is practically no water supply laid on at all, or where whatever water supply there is is barely more than enough for the requirements of cooking, drinking, and washing. It is all very well to say that nobody should live in such cottages but, after all, the hon. Member for the Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) pointed out that the real intention of the Bill was to do for landlords what they had been so slack as not to do for themselves. That is not the intention of the Bill at all. The intention of the Measure is, as far as we can, to improve the conditions of the tenants of rural cottages which have no prospect of being improved under any other Measure at present on the Statute Book. If hon. Members opposite, instead of thinking in terms of baths, would bear that in mind, we should get a little further with regard to this Measure.
It seems to be suggested that if you have not got an adequate water supply, and have to carry your water a considerable distance, in limited amounts, and then to heat it under difficulties, it is a matter of convenience to put that hot water into a fixed bath. I would remind hon. Members opposite that hot water is something like thought, and that depth is after better than superficial area, and that applies very much to the question of the provision of baths. Hon. Members opposite think that those who are supporting this Bill have two objects, and that one is to subsidise the landlords and the other is to prevent rural tenants having baths. Such thoughts do not enter into our minds,
but we try to approach this question with a little common sense, and it is not common sense to put in this Amendment and tie down the conditions under which these improvements can be made, because such an Amendment is not going to prevent a lot of dishonest landlords getting Government subsidies. The result will be to prevent a lot of rural tenants having much needed improvements made to their cottages, which, without this Amendment, they would get. I am very glad indeed the Minister has resisted the Amendment.

Mr. BARR: I think the Minister was far astray when he thought we did not really understand the difference between a new house and a reconditioned house, but our position is that the very arguments that apply to compelling the provision of a bath, to the extent done under the Acts of 1923 and 1924 to a new house, apply also in the changed conditions to a house that is reconditioned under this Bill. In each of those Acts there was given a discretion to the Minister, but, subject to that discretion, the local authorities had power to insist, under the 1923 Act, on a fixed bath, and, under the 1924 Act, on a fixed bath in a bathroom. I would also point out that all the Commissions that have investigated this subject, at least in Scotland, have insisted very strongly on the need for such baths being provided in all rural as in other areas. I may say that in the Royal Commission on the Housing of the Industrial Classes, of which I had the honour to be a member, it was carried that local authorities should have power in all cases to insist on such baths, and I would like to pay a tribute to one who was not at all a Labour man. I mean Sir William Younger, of Auchen Castle, himself living in a castle and having every comfort and convenience, who ever acted on the truly Christian principle that he desired that others should have, in whatever circumstances of life, the same comforts and convenience as he enjoyed himself, and who led the movement in that Commission to give power to all local authorities to insist on baths and bathrooms being provided.
Not only so, hut the Scottish Conference on Agricultural Policy which, I think, in many of its features, has the support of hon. and right hon. Members
opposite, laid down that new houses, at least, should be of three apartments, and should have a bath-room unless that was dispensed with by the local authorities. What are some of the objections to our insistence on baths? I know one of the objections is that agricultural workers have no desire for them, and that they are not appreciated by them. I dare say it would not be difficult to give the reason. As a matter of fact one farm servant, Mr. James Rothiemay who, I think, afterwards became the general secretary of the Farm Labourers Union in Scotland, said:
There are some who cannot appreciate it, because they do not know what it means. They have not had a bath so long as they can remember, and they look upon it as likely to be a source of trouble.
At the same time the Convener of Dumfries-shire and the Sanitary Inspector of Kirkcudbright and many farm servants themselves came forward to state how much baths were appreciated. Another argument was that the miners and agricultural labourers would not know how to use a bath, and, particularly, we were told that they would put coals in the bath. Why does any woman put coals in her bath? Because she has not been provided with a coal cellar, and as long as you do not give her a coal cellar, I think it a fit and proper protest to go on putting coals in the bath.
I should like this scheme to be something of an education, and the more of these conveniences and comforts you give, the more you are educating the tastes of the people to desire and appreciate these things. There were some strong evidence of that. We had 45,000 new houses provided, to the extent of 36 per cent. out of State money, for agricultural labourers in Ireland, and the testimony was that the houses were on the whole well-kept, and every convenience was appreciated in a way it had not been before. Some of the objections are as to the difficulty of putting a bath in an old house, and as to the lack of water supply. In this very Measure, in the first Clause, Subsection (2, b), provision is taken for schemes to bring in water supplies, among other things. Therefore, you will, at a small expense probably, be able to lay down a water supply that may serve several of these agricultural labourers. Therefore, that difficulty does not apply
very seriously. I lived in the country myself, and I may say that any water had to be got by hard pumping from a well that was sunk. We do not wish to be unreasonable. We would be quite satisfied to have it subject to discretion of the local authority, as it is in the 1923 and 1924 Acts, so that such an arrangement, if found impossible, would be dispensed with. We do not wish to insist, if the thing be absolutely unreasonable and impossible. The Minister said that only £100 could be provided, and the owner would be required to do it at his own expense. But the owner is getting a gift, really, subject to certain conditions, of £100, and he could well afford on his own account in such a case to put in a bath and bathroom.
I would like to echo what fell from my hon. Friend, that, after all, the agricultural labourer is as much entitled to his bath, and I would even say he needs it more than any hon. Member in this House. I do not want to quote too much, but I cannot help recalling the words of John Ball:
By what right are they whom we call lords greater folk than we? On what grounds have they deserved it? They have leisure and fine houses; we have pain and labour, the rain and the wind in the fields. And yet it is of us and of our toil that these men hold their state.
It is because they have to sweat in the fields that they need water supply and baths more than others. This should not be a mere slipshod Measure, and a mere apology for providing houses. We are really fixing in these rural houses the condition of housing which may prevail for a generation. I know in Scotland it has been impossible to get the authorities to move at all, to have anything done under any of the Acts. The last Report of the Scottish Board of Health is a continual chorus of inability to get the Act applied. The 1919 Act, they say, for some reason was not taken advantage of; and as to the 1923 Act, they say there is no information as to the extent these powers have been used for the purpose of providing houses for farm servants. There is the same chorus of regret and disappointment at the 1924 Act, that even the inducements specially held out have not led authorities to move. Therefore, I believe that they will rely on
this, and make it an excuse that something has been done. We think that something more worthy and more substantial should be done, because it may fix the housing in many areas for a generation. I am sure the Secretary of State for Scotland will bear me out that in this matter of sanitary conveniences in the rural areas of Scotland, taken as a whole, the condition is a deplorable one, if not a scandalous one. George Ramage, a ploughman, was questioned before the Royal Commission:
Do you know of any case where proper sanitary appliances are put into ploughmen's houses?
The answer was:
No—in no case in the countryside.
I say here is an opportunity, in a small way, apart from anything that is imposible to be done, to press this forward and do something to remedy the scandalous condition of affairs, and to educate the taste of the workers in rural areas. I believe a good deal of this work that is proposed is no real economy at all. It will all have to be done over again. Mr. Middleton, factor on the Kilmarnock estates, said before the Commission that "to patch them up, it would not be worth while." And yet to the backward authorities in Scotland you are giving the excuse to say that a great deal has been done, and that they need not think of producing new houses.
I should like to say one word on the other part of the Amendment, as to the partition of the rooms and the requirements of decency. I think this is a very urgent matter in Scotland. I would not like to weary the House with too many figures, but I will give one or two that may perhaps astonish some hon. Gentlemen as to the condition of affairs in Scotland generally, and particularly in regard to apartments with only one room. In the census of 1921 there are figures showing the numbers of occupants living in the single-roomed house. I will not deal with rooms that have four or under, but will take those with five dwellers and over in a single-apartment house, undivided, and without any partition. The number of houses with five living in those conditions is 12,657. In the case of six dwelling in single-roomed house the number of houses is 7,712; seven in the single-roomed house, 4,005; eight in the single-roomed house, 1,865; and nine in the
single-roomed house, 806 houses. [An HON. MEMBER: "Are those rural?"] I said for the whole of Scotland. There are 435 that have more than nine dwelling in the single-roomed house running up to 13 and 14. I say that is contrary to all decency, to all morality and to all Christianity, and I cannot understand how the Government should not take advantage of this Amendment, and at least provide some partition and some manner of decency in the houses which they are reconditioning.

Mr. RYE: I only intervene because of the reference to overcrowding made by the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down. If there is—and I have no doubt it is the case—so much overcrowding in Scotland, does he think that the cottager with limited accommodation to-day will thank him or his party for moving and pressing an Amendment which will result in taking away one of the rooms, and turning it into a bathroom?

Mr. CHARLETON: We are accused of not thinking out the question raised in this Bill, and I should like to answer one of the points made by the hon. and gallant Member for Yeovil (Major Davies). An argument he put up against having a bath in an agricultural cottage was that they could only heat water under difficulties. I should like to ask whether a house where they can only heat water under difficulties is a really habitable house? Of course, he, perhaps, is so far up in the social scale, that it never comes under his notice, but we of the working classes have to do our own washing at home, for instance, and we need water for that purpose once a week and sometimes more often, and I do suggest that if water cannot be heated in quantities sufficient for the weekly washing, that house is not habitable.

Sir W. LANE MITCHELL: They take it to wash-places.

Mr. CHARLETON: The hon. Member does not know anything about it. If he were put to wash his own shirt, or if he had to light a copper fire, he would not know how to do it.

Major DAVIES: Are all these graceful compliments being applied to me?

Mr. CHARLETON: I was replying to the hon. Member for Streatham (Sir W.
Lane Mitchell), who never makes a speech. If he knew the conditions from actual experience, and not merely from passing in a motor-car, enjoying the beauties of the country from the outside, he would not have spoken as he did. It does seem to me that the first thing that is necessary in a modern house is the proper heating of water. Things have changed since the days of Erasmus. The Minister spoke about the cost of putting in a bath. The hon. Member for Pontypridd (Mr. Mardy Jones) offered a compromise and again the Minister objected to that. Does he know that a bath with brass fittings can be bought for £3 15s., and that to fix a waste pipe to it would not cost more than £2 or £3? In country places where there is only a well or a pump a fixed bath with a waste pipe would be a Godsend to the woman.
There has been talk about coals being kept in the bath. I know how that story began. In the East End of Loudon, 25 years ago, some well-intentioned people built houses for the working classes and put in baths. The baths were put in the scullery, and had neither a water supply nor a waste pipe. The rents were very high, and the tenants found it necessary to let some of the rooms, and as in those circumstances the fixed bath was found to be more trouble than a portable bath, and as there was no adequate coal cellar, the bath was used as a coal store. That is the whole story. In a modern house we ought to have a bath; even if there was not a water supply, a bath with a waste pipe would be useful to prevent waste water having to be carried about. I suggest that most cottagers want enough water every now and again in order to scald a pig. I am not a countryman, but I have been a good deal in the country, going with trains into the country and having to stay the night, and I have lodged with country people, and have many a time helped to scald a pig, carrying it to the bath after it has had its throat cut. If there is enough water to wash clothes and to scald a pig, surely there will be enough water for a bath. It seems that we are getting back to the old conditions where, when a tenant complained about the drains, the landlord thought he ought to be satisfied with a twopenny packet of carbolic powder. This Amendment is being resisted entirely
in the interests of landlords and against the interests of cottagers.

Mr. VIANT: I wish to reinforce the appeal made to the Minister by the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Mr. Mardy Jones). We know there are difficulties in regard to water supply in the country, but the difficulties are not insuperable. They may be when dealing with a single cottage, but there will be numbers of instances where a row of cottages will be reconditioned, and in those circumstances the collective effort of the rural council, or even of the county council, could provide an adequate water supply. A good water supply is essential for the health of the community, and it is agreed also that a bath is essential for the health of a person; and I think we ought to give as much consideration to the health of the agricultural worker as we appear to give to the owner of property. When a house is erected in the country for a well-to-do person if the water supply is not adequate steps are taken to obtain a sufficient supply. It ought not to be left to the owner of the property to decide whether a request for a bath is a reasonable request, because he will always make the excuse that it is not. I heard of a case the other day where a country house was erected and nine bathrooms were put in, and even in that case the servants were denied the opportunity of using one of them—so little consideration is given to workers in the rural areas. Where it is reasonable or possible for a fixed bath to be placed in a house, the local authority ought to see that it is done.
The second part of the Amendment has not received the consideration it deserves —I refer to the need for adequate partitions. Far too often partitions are erected which are in no sense of the word adequate. Often they are so slight that one can hear the thoughts of the person in the next room. Partitions ought to be of reasonable thickness, and so constructed that there is not likely to be a shrinkage of the timber with the inevitable result of gaps showing and the impossibility of guaranteeing decency. Partitions constructed with rough-edged timber, where the joints do not fit closely together, ought not to be permitted.

Mr. PALING: The arguments that have been put from this side are so strong that I feel pretty sure the Minister cannot
contend against them, and that it is only prejudice which will allow him to tell his well-disciplined followers they must go into the Lobby against the Amendment. In Committee the Minister stated that in his opinion paragraph (b) of Sub-section (2), with the words "sanitary conveniences" included baths, and that if any owner of property who was taking advantage of this Bill wanted to instal a bath he could do so. I believe, however, that members of the Tory party themselves were uncertain whether those words would actually convey that meaning, and I know that quite a few of them were definitely of the opinion that they would not. One of them is an expert with considerable knowledge in these matters. The Parliamentary Secretary raises his eyes and wants to know who it is. Does he think the hon. and gallant Member for St. Albans (Lieut.-Colonel Fremantle) is not an expert in this matter? He is the advisory medical officer of health for the county of Hertfordshire, and I believe he stated in one of his speeches that baths would not come under this term "sanitary conveniences." The Minister has indicated this afternoon, under pressure from the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Mr. Mardy Jones) that he will consider a suggestion to send out a Circular stating that baths may be included under the terms of this Bill, and I want to press him upon that point. If we cannot get this Amendment, I am anxious that anybody who takes advantage of the Bill and may be inclined to pat in a bath—either a fixed bath in a bathroom by itself, or even a bath without the bathroom—shall have every facility to do so; and as the terms of the Bill stand I am afraid he may be prevented with the ruling that the terms of the Bill do not permit it. I am sorry the Government will not accept the Amendment; but if the Minister will give us this crumb we shall have gained something.

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am sorry the Government have not seen their way to meet us on this point. Even if we were to admit that our Amendment asked for something really substantial, it does not appear that we should make it any more acceptable by reducing it to more modest terms. I fail to appreciate the Minister's arguments. His first argument was that a fixed bath in a bathroom was not compulsory under the Act
of 1924: but it is now 1926, and we have a right to ask for more in 1926 than in 1924. In 1923 we had the fixed bath; in 1924 we added the words "in a bathroom"; and now we wish to go a step further and to ensure that when houses are improved under this Act the improvement shall include the provision of adequate bathing arrangements. The right hon. Gentleman said, "If you do that, and there are other improvements, the cost will have to come out of the owner's pocket." Why not? He may receive up to £100 of public money, and, therefore, it is not too much to ask that the improvements should include the provision of proper bathing facilities. Then it was said there was no analogy between this Bill and the Housing Acts because, under this Bill, there is no obligation to build. That was perfectly true also under the 1923 Act, and if only compulsory duties are to have conditions attached to them, then I fear the fabric of English law will fall to pieces. Our point is that, just as the 1923 and the 1924 Acts imposed definite conditions with regard to bathing facilities, similar obligations ought to apply to houses which under this Act, are to be improved at the expense largely of the public. I would like the House to know where we stand on this matter. We say that if houses in the country are to be improved the improvement should include bathing facilities, and we have already admitted that we would be pre-

pared to compromise on our original Amendment.

Where do hon. Members opposite stand on this question? No assistance must be given under this Bill unless the local authorities are satisfied that the dwelling will, after the completion of the work, be in all respects fit for habitation as a dwelling by persons of the working classes. The rebuff we have had to-night means evading that Clause, and that the Government does not regard the provision of a bath as being necessary to make a house satisfactory from the working-class point of view. The action of the Government on this Amendment bears no other interpretation, and it is a direct discouragement to the improvement we suggest. Consequently it must go forth from this House if this Amendment is defeated, that the Government standard of working-class houses is one which does not require the provision of a bath or of a fixed bath at all. I hope, on reflection, the Government will see the wisdom of providing some definite standard in this matter, and it ought to be possible to arrive at some form of words to secure that, if there is not to be a fixed bath in a bathroom, there should be a fixed bath, and it should not go forth that the Government's idea of a working-class house is something which approximates to a stable.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 95; Noes, 227.

Division No. 533.
AYES.
[6.4 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Duncan, C
Lowth, T.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Dunnico, H.
Lunn, William


Ammon, Charles George
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gillett, George M.
March, S.


Raker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Gosling, Harry
Maxton, James


Baker, Walter
Graham, Rt. Hon. Win, (Edin., Cent.)
Montague, Frederick


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Barr, J.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Naylor, T. E.


Batey, Joseph
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Groves, T.
Paling, W.


Bondfield, Margaret
Gruody, T. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Bromfield, William
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Bromley, J.
Hall, F. (York, W.R. Normanton)
Potts, John S.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Hardie, George D.
Riley, Ben


Cape, Thomas
Harris, Percy A.
Rose, Frank H.


Charleton, H. C.
Hayes, John Henry
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Clowes, S.
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Cluse, W. S.
Hirst, W, (Bradford, South)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Connolly, M.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Cove, W. G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kelly, W. T.
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Stamford, T. W.


Dennison, R.
Lee, F.
Stephen, Campbell


Taylor, R. A.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Windsor, Walter


Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Welsh, J. C.
Wright, W.


Thurtle, Ernest
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Townend, A. E.
Whiteley, W.



Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Viant, S. P.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Mr. B. Smith and Mr. A. Barnes.


Wallhead, Richard C.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)



NOES.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. sir James T.
Eraser, Captain Ian
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Albery, Irving James
Frece, Sir Walter de
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Galbraith, J. F. w.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Apsley, Lord
Gates, Percy
Neville, R. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Goff, Sir Park
Nuttall, Ellis


Atkinson, C.
Gower, Sir Robert
Oakley, T.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Grace, John
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Penny, Frederick George


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Perring, Sir William George


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Bennett, A. J.
Hall, Capt. w. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Hammersley, S. S.
Raine, W.


Berry, Sir George
Harrison, G. J. C.
Ramsden, E.


Bethel, A.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Betterton, Henry B.
Haslam, Henry C.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Hawke, John Anthony
Remnant, Sir James


Boothby. R. J. G.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Rentoul, G. S.


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Brass, Captain w.
Hills, Major John Waller
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon, sir S. J. G.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Briggs, J. Harold
Hogg, Rt-Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Ropner, Major L.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'I'd., Hexham)
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.c. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Rye, F. G.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hudson, R.S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hume, Sir G. H.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Bullock, Captain M.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Burman, J. B.
Huntingfield, Lord
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hurd, Percy A.
Savery, S. S.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hurst, Gerald B.
Shaw, R. G (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hutchison, G. A.CIark(MidI'n & P'bl's)
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Cayzer, Sir C (Chester, City)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth, S.)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Skelton, A. N.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Jacob, A. E.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Smithers, Waldron


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Christie, J. A.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, COL. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Clayton, G. C.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Wetlm'eland)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Storry, Deans, R.


Cope, Major William
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Sueter, Rear-Admlral Murray Fraser


Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Looker, Herbert William
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Lord, Walter Greaves-
Thorn, Lt. Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Tinne, J. A.


Davies, Maj. Geo.F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Davies, Dr. Vernon
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
McLean, Major A.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Macmillan, Captain H.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)




Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Dixey, A. C.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John



Drewe, C.
Macquisten, F. A.
Warrencer, Sir Victor


Edmondson, Major A. J.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Elveden, Viscount
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Watts, Dr T.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Malone, Major P. B.
Wells, S. R.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Margesson, Capt. D
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Fairtax, Captain J. G.
Meller, R. J.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Fielden, E. B.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Windsor-CIive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Moles, Thomas
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wise, Sir Fredric




Womersley, W. J.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.
Major Hennessy and Mr. F, C.


Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Wragg, Herbert
Thomson.


Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.

Mr. RYE: I beg to move, in page 3, line 25, at the end, to insert the words
or on the ground that the nature of the proposed works would be prejudicial to the surrounding buildings or to the character of the locality.
When I brought forward a somewhat similar amendment during the Committee stage, I used the words "amenities of the neighbourhood," and objection was taken to that form of words on the ground that it was too wide, and on the further ground that it would result in some snobbish individuals objecting to any alteration of a cottage because it would interfere with their amenities and convenience. Therefore, I amended the words for the purpose of to-day's Debate, and put them in the form I am now moving. I did so because I wanted to bring home to the local authorities the necessity of seeing that the surrounding buildings were not affected and not prejudiced. After all, as hon. Members will appreciate, there is a great deal of charm in our country cottages, and it would be a great mistake if the local authorities were to authorise anything that would take away and detract from that charm. For example, it would be open to a local authority to make a proposal for adding to a Cotswold cottage some tin shed or shanty, which would prejudice the surroundings, and for that reason I think that the House ought to accept this Amendment. It is put forward in the interests of all, and I hope for that reason the House will accept my Amendment.

Mr. HURD: I beg to second the Amendment.
I noticed in the "Times" to-day there is evidence of a new movement with regard to preserving the character of our villages, of which we are so proud. It is quite obvious that the character of a village would be seriously interfered with if, for example, you had a corrugated extension to a Wiltshire cottage. We are all very proud of our country villages, and, in view of this new movement, we should give local authorities the opportunity of taking steps to prevent things of a prejudicial character being done under this Bill.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: With the purpose of this Amendment as described by the Mover and Seconder I am in full sympathy, but I would like to point out to the House that that purpose is already achieved under the Bill as it stands. I listened carefully to find out what was the particular case which would be dealt with by this Amendment, and an instance was given of an inartistic extension to an artistic cottage. That is covered by the words immediately preceding, which are:
The local authority …. shall refuse to give such assistance if it appears to them …. in the case of a house or building to which any historic, architectural or artistic interest attaches, that the proposed works would destroy or seriously diminish that interest.
I think it is clear that assistance would not be given for the erection of any such thing as a corrugated iron extension, and I cannot see that any further words are required. I would also call the attention of my hon. Friends to the fact that
The local authority may in any case refuse to give assistance under this Act on any grounds which seem to them sufficient.
That being so, I think it would be superfluous to put in any further words; and, further, I am inclined to think that the words chosen by my hon. Friend—which, I may incidentally point out, do not read as they have been moved—might tend to cause a surveyor to take, perhaps, a stricter view of the powers of the local authority to refuse assistance than would be desirable. I hope, therefore, that my hon. Friend will not press this Amendment.

Mr. RYE: I do not think I should be tied down to the single instance that I gave. I agree that that instance is covered by the wording to which the Minister has referred, but there might be other cases. It might happen, say in a Cotswold village, that someone might wish to put up an addition which would not interfere with the architectural effect of any particular cottage, but would undoubtedly be prejudicial. I can call to mind a case in a village in Hampshire, where there is a very fine old half-timbered building, which probably was origiNally a yeoman's cottage, and, immediately opposite it, some years ago, an
atrocious modern building was erected in the ugliest possible red brick, with stone facings and a tiled roof; and that building undoubtedly, by its mere presence, has detracted from the value of its surroundings. It is that class of building about which I am concerned. I fully admit that under this Bill there will be no question of the erection of a new building, but there must and will be many cases where something might be done by virtue of the Bill that would have an effect on the surroundings. The countryside, of which, as my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Hurd) has correctly said, everyone is so proud, is one of the attractions to visitors who come to this country from abroad. It is desirable that they should be able to able to see these delightful cottages in their wonderful old surroundings, and, if we allow local authorities, who may be possessed of no taste whatever, to pass schemes which will detract from the beauty of the surroundings, we shall be making a very great mistake. Although I agree that the Minister has given a convincing reply as regards the instance I mentioned, I could, if I had sufficient time and if I had had sufficient experience of speaking in this House, place before it many others, and I have not the least doubt that those who have more skill in these matters would be able to multiply instances. However that may be, I suggest to the House that no possible harm could come from the insertion of these words, and that it is in our interest to see that rural surroundings are retained with their present charm. I hope, therefore, that the Minister, on reflection, even now may accept my Amendment, which I intend to press.

Mr. PALING: One might think, if we had not been through the Committee stage, during which this matter has already been discussed, that the hon. Member for Loughborough (Mr. Rye), in putting down this Amendment, was trying to carry out in detail the elaborate description which the Minister gave in his Second Reading speech, when he referred to the aesthetic qualities of such places, to the preservation of the genius that existed there, and the rest of it. I am not quite sure, however, that that is the case. I think, rather, that this Amendment is designed to carry out the idea of
an Amendment which the hon. Member put down in Committee, and which contained the word "amenities." In any event, whatever the hon. Member may mean, it seems to me curious to suggest that we should only improve the housing accommodation of workers where it does not interfere with any interest or with anything that is beautiful in the eyes of she hon. Member. It seems to be suggested that, if building an extra room—and I think the hon. Member quoted this in Committee— which might make all the difference between the house being fit for habitation and not fit for habitation, was going to spoil the amenities of the place, the room ought not to be built. Some of these old cottages, however, to which the hon. Member referred in such glowing terms, are only beautiful on the outside. Inside, they are equivalent to some of the worst slums in our cities. If I thought that the inclusion of an Amendment like this meant that, because of their outside beauty, these houses had to stop where they were, and the people had to live in them under conditions approaching slumdom, I should, on that ground alone, resist the Amendment with all the force of which I am capable.
There is another thing in regard to which I am a bit suspicious of this Amendment. I suspect that it is designed to prevent the conversion into working-class houses of such buildings as may be within the vicinity of the houses of certain wealthy gentlemen. Stables, barns, cottages, and I believe the right hon. Gentleman mentioned piggeries, might be turned into houses under this Bill; but, while wealthy people in country mansions do not object to horses, cows, and so on, they would object to workers, and if workers were going to live in those stables and other buildings that were to be turned into houses, then, rather than have them in the vicinity of their mansions, they would take advantage of this Amendment, because, while they do not object to horses or cattle, they would object to agricultural workers. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] Yes, and this snobbish instinct still exists in a good many people up and down the country, and I am afraid that this Amendment is being proposed in order to prevent places of that description from being turned into
cottages for the workers. For these reasons I shall have pleasure in resisting the Amendment.

Mr. SKELTON: I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman entirely covered, by the reference to the preceding words of the Clause, the point made by my hon. Friend, which, clearly, is the general appearance of a whole village or district. I do not think, if I may say so in the most uncontroversial way, that the hon. Gentleman who spoke last has any real grounds for saying that this is a party, still less a snobbish, matter. I seem to remember that that right hon. Gentleman the leader of the Labour party, not very long ago, pointed out, as a real menace to the artistic value of England, the type of house that was being erected—

Mr. PALING: These are not new houses.

Mr. SKELTON: Quite so, but exactly the same argument would prevail with even greater force. One can quite understand that, in the more or less expensive work of constructing new houses, artistic considerations might well have to take second place, whereas, in the less expensive work of converting houses, surely, the general conditions of the district are well worth taking into account and keeping in mind while the work of conversion is being done. That is the whole point that is brought forward by my hon. Friend, and, if I may, I would urge the Minister, even now, to consider whether the wording to which he referred does really cover my hon. Friend's point, and, if it does not, whether it is not worth while, all class and party considerations being properly and obviously set aside here, to take particular care that the artistic qualities of England and Scotland, which are unrivalled, should be kept in view when we are passing this Measure.

Mr. RHYS: During the Committee stage, my hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough (Mr. Rye) moved an Amendment which contained the word "amenities," and I, among other, thought that perhaps that might be too wide an application; but the form in which the Amendment has now been proposed removes many of my fears, and I do not see that there could be any
harm in putting in words of this kind. My original fear was rather lest, in the case, say, of a village with thatched roofs, owing to the great difficulty in getting thatchers nowadays, a leaky thatched roof might be replaced by, say, a red-tiled roof, which would not be on the same lines as the roofs of the other cottages. I think my hon. Friend put the case very well when he painted out the desirability that the countryside should look its best, not only for the sake of those who live there, but for the sake of the numbers who go out into the country on Saturdays and Sundays, and who are a great source of revenue to those who live there. I think that for this reason it would be well that there should be some guiding words, agreed to by the Minister, of this nature. We do not, of course, want to see anyone living in a cottage with a leaky roof, and that ought to be the first consideration, but, subject to that, I am not sure that words of a similar nature to those proposed by my hon. Friend might not very well be inserted in the Bill.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Perhaps I may say one word more, in reply to my two hon. Friends who have just spoken. I do not think that even now they quite appreciate the extent to which the point is covered by the words already in the Bill. My hon. Friend the Member for Perth (Mr. Skelton) said that the point of this Amendment was to protect, not the particular building which was being altered, but the general character of the locality; but he did not explain how an alteration which is going to be prejudicial to the character of the locality can fail to be prejudicial also to the character of the building to which it is made.

Mr. SKELTON: I am sorry to interrupt, but what I had in view was that you might so alter a building, which had none of the characteristics described by the words which the right hon. Gentleman quoted from the Bill, but which yet might have a most deleterious effect upon the whole of the buildings around it which had those characteristics.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Then you would have to suppose that in an artistic village there is a building which, without being artistic itself, nevertheless cannot be described as prejudicial to the general character of the locality. Really, I think
the distinction has become so subtle as to be almost fantastic. I must point out to my hon. Friends that, even if this Amendment were agreed to, it would still be necessary to rely upon the final opinion of the local authority. Under the Amendment they are only to refuse to give assistance if it appears to them that the nature of the proposed works will be prejudicial, but already, as I have pointed out, the local authority have power to refuse to give assistance on any ground that seems to them sufficient. Why should it seem to them more sufficient because these words are put in, when the preceding words have already the same direct effect? I suggest most seriously to my hon. Friend that this Amendment is not necessary, and that it is undesirable to put unnecessary words in the Bill.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member for Loughborough (Mr. Rye) has also handed in a manuscript Amendment, to insert words, at the end of line 2, on page 4, with regard to the case of a building divided into two or more separate dwellings. I do not propose to select that Amendment, because it is so like the one with which we have already dealt.

Mr. BARR: I beg to move, in page 4, line 22, to leave out from the word "paid" to the end of paragraph (c).
This paragraph contains a provision by which a breach of the conditions, which has admittedly taken place, may be condoned by the local authority on the ground that it was not due to the act, default or connivance of the owner, and he may still continue in possession of the house and of the privileges that he has under this Bill. These conditions are detailed. They are that the value of the house on the completion of the work shall not exceed £400, that the cost of the works themselves shall not be less than £50, and also, and perhaps more apposite still to the Amendment, the condition of the streets as well as the narrowness, closeness or bad arrangement would be such as to be against the repairs having been executed if it had been known. And yet more important is the kind of party that may be in the house. You may have a case where an agricultural labourer has left the house altogether, and it is now occupied by one who is not really within the bounds of the Act at all, and instead
of the owner repaying the money because he has not honoured the conditions, the local authority has power to condone what he has done, and to allow the breach to continue; even a continuing breach may be condoned, and the matter may be carried on. Although the house has really, owing to new conditions, passed out of the purpose for which these grants and loans were given, and particularly the grants, because the loans are exempt from conditions as the Bill stands, they are able to condone the offence and allow him to reap the benefit without fulfilling the conditions.
This is a most dangerous power to put into the Bill. In Scotland—and I do not suppose it differs materially in England— these county councils are composed very largely of landowners, factors, and their friends—tenant farmers. It is provided under Clause 7 that a member must not vote on a question in which he is interested, but that does not prevent a landowner wielding all the influence he has with his factor and his tenants. Perhaps there is not a single man in authority but is a tied man and is subject to that kind of influence. This is a most dangerous provision, and it might lead to a great deal of real corruption, although it might be safeguarded to some extent by Clause 7. There is no necessity for it. It would create differences in different parts of the country. There might be a local authority that acted strictly and enforced the repayment of the money when the conditions were proved not to have been fulfilled, but in other parts of the country you would have continual condoning of breaches of the Act, and you would have these public grants given in respect of houses which no longer fulfilled the conditions, which indeed had not from the very beginning fulfilled the conditions. There might have been a breach, for example, of the condition that the value of the property should not be more than £400, or it might turn out that there had not been the needful £50 expended on it, and all the conditions as to those for whom the houses were provided might have become inoperative. They might not be fulfilled in the slightest degree. You have given away these grants of money, and because the landowner has influence with those who constitute the local authorities, particularly the county councils, you have the whole purpose of your Act set at naught and you have the grant still continuing to the landowner.
It is a most dangerous proposal altogether to put in the Bill, and I certainly think we should offer strong opposition to this part of the Clause.

Mr. PALING: I beg to second the Amendment.

Sir K. WOOD: I think that the hon. Member has wholly misunderstood the effect of the paragraph, and he particularly omitted to look at the words
If the local authority are satisfied in any such case that the breach was not duo to the act, default, or connivance of the owner.
The local authority first has to be satisfied that no breach of that kind has occurred. Anyone who has given any thought to the conditions named in the Bill could, no doubt, envisage a case like this, where an owner has let a property to a tenant who has sub-let it and broken all the conditions imposed by the Bill. He might very well let it to someone who used it as a week-end cottage without the owner's knowledge. It would be most unfair in a case like that that the local authority should have to say, "You have broken the conditions, give us the money back." The owner would obviously say: "I did not know a thing about it. It is entirely the fault of my tenant." To say that in such a case
the authority may, with the consent of the Minister and subject to such conditions, if any, as he may approve, waive the liability to make repayment under the foregoing provisions 
is obviously the proper course. In a case where the original tenant sub-lets a cottage for a week-end residence it would obviously take the owner some weeks to go to the County Court, get a decision,

and have the tenant turned out. It would be very unfair in such a case that the local authority should not have power to say: "We are satisfied that you have taken proceedings. Obviously, it will take you a few weeks to get a judgment, and until that happens we will suspend the enforcement of the provisions of the Bill." That follows a good many similar Clauses in thousands of documents which have been drawn up in this country—I do not know about Scotland—for hundreds of years giving a discretion in a case of breach of covenant where the person who would be mulcted has had nothing to do with it and is in no way responsible. It is to meet cases of that kind that the Clause has been inserted, and it is a very proper and reasonable Clause.

Mr. KELLY: The hon. Gentleman's speech shows how generous the Government are to these people in making particular provision that they may not be put to the cost that is mentioned in the first part of the paragraph, which says
shall on being demanded by the local council.
The local authority has itself to make up its mind that it is going to take action, but the hon. Gentleman is not satisfied with that. He makes provision to protect those people who break the law in the way he has suggested by letting cottages for week-end purposes. I hope my hon. Friend will press the Amendment.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 233; Noes, 109.

Division No. 534.]
AYES.
[6.41 p.m.


Albery, Irving James
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Christie, J. A.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C, M. S.
Brass, Captain W.
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.


Apsley, Lord
Briggs, J. Harold
Clayton, G. C.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Cope, Major William


Atkinson, C.
Brown, Maj. D. c. (N'th'l'd.,Hexham)
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Buckingham, Sir H.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Bullock, Captain M.
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Burman, J. B.
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon w.
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo.F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Bennett, A. J.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Davies, Dr. Vernon


Berry, Sir George
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Davison, Sir w. H. (Kensington, S)


Bethel, A.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt.R.(Prtsmth.S.)
Dawson, Sir Philip


Botterton, Henry B.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Boothby, R. J. G.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Dixey, A. C.


Drewe, C.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Duckworth, John
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rye, F. G.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Samuel. A M. (Surrey, Fernham)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Elveden, Viscount
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Erskine, James Malcolm Montelth
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff. South)
Loder, J. de V.
Savery, S. S,


Everard, W. Lindsay
Looker, Herbert William
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Lord, Walter Greaves-
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vera
Skelton, A. N.


Fielden, E. B.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Smithers, Waldron


Forrest, W.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


FaxCroft, Captain C. T.
McLean, Major A.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Frece, Sir Walter de
Macnaghten. Hon. sir Malcolm
Storry-Deans, R.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Macquisten, F. A.
Stuart. Crichton., Lord C.


Ganzoni, Sir John
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Gates, Percy
Maitland, Sir Arthur O. Steel.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Tasker, Malor R. Inigo


Goff, Sir Park
Malone, Major P. B.
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Gower, Sir Robert
Marriott. Sir J. A. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Grace, John
Meller, R. J.
Tinne, J. A.


Grant, Sir J. A.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark. Lanark)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Wilder)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Grotrian, H. Brent
Moore, Lieut.-Col. T. C. R. (Ayr]
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C
Warner, Brigadier-General W, W.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hammersley, S. S.
Neville, R. J.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Harrison, G. J. C.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Nleid, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Watts, Dr. T.


Haslam, Henry C.
Nuttall, Ellis
Wells. S. R.


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Oakley, T.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Henderson. Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Williams, A M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G
Penny, Frederick George
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St.Marylebone)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Perring, Sir William George
Wlnby, Colonel L. P.


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Windsor.Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hope, Sir Harry (Fortarl
Raine, W.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Ramsden, E.
Womersley, w. J.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wood, B. c. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland,Whiteh'n)
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Hume, Sir G. H.
Remnant, Sir James
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Rentoul, G. S.
Woodcock. Colonel H. C.


Huntingfield, Lord
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Hurd, Percy A.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wragg, Herbert


Hurst, Gerald B.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Hutchison,G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)



Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Ropner, Major L.
Major Hcnnessy and Captain


Jacob, A. E.
Ruggles-Brice, Major E. A.
Margcsson.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Cove, W. G.
Grundy, T. w.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)


Ammon, Charles George
Dalton, Hugh
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton'


Attlee, Clement Richard
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Hardie, George D.


Baker, Walter
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Harris, Percy A.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Day, Colonel Harry
Hayes, John Henry


Barnes, A.
Dennison, R.
Hirst, G. H.


Barr, J.
Duncan, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Batey, Joseph
Dunnico, H.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Bondfield, Margaret
Fenby, T. D.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Briant, Frank
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Bromfield, William
Gardner, J. P.
Jones, T. t. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Bromley, J.
Gillett, George M.
Kelly, W. T.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Gosling, Harry
Kennedy, T.


Caps, Thomas
Greenall, T.
Lawrence, Susan


Charleton, H. C.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lawson. John James


Clowes, S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lee, F.


Cluse. W. S.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lowth, T.


Connolly, M.
Groves, T.
Lunn, William




Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


March, s.
Sinclair Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Maxton, James
Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Welsh, J. C.


Montague, Frederick
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Morrison, R. c. (Tottenham, N.J
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Whiteley, W.


Naylor, T. E
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles
Wiggins, William Martin


Oliver, George Harold
Stamford, T. W.
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Owen, Major G.
Stephen, Campbell
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercliffe)


Paling, W.
Taylor, R. A.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Ponsonby, Arthur
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Windsor, Walter


Potts, John S.
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Wright, W.


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Riley, Ben
Thurtle, Ernest



Rose, Frank H.
Townend, A. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Salter, Dr. Alfred
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. B.


Scurr, John
Viant, S. P.
Smith.


Sexton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 4, line 36, to leave out paragraph (d).
This Amendment must be taken in conjunction with paragraph (c) and with the Amendment in Clause 3, page 8, line 14, at the end, to insert a new Sub-section
(5) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment or rule of law relating to the jurisdiction of County Courts, the County Court of the district in which a dwelling is situate may, on the application of the local authority—

(a) whether or not any other relief is claimed, grant an injunction restraining the breach, or apprehended breach, of any condition applying to the dwelling by virtue of this Section other than the condition imposed by paragraph (c) of Sub-section (1) of this Section; or
(b) make an Order directing payment to the authority of any sum which has become payable to it by reason of the breach of any condition applying to the dwelling by virtue of this Section.
These two Amendments are put down in order to carry out a promise that was made by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary whilst the Bill was 1.o. Committee. For the benefit of those who were not on the Committee, I may explain that paragraph (c) deals with what is to be done in the event of a breach of the conditions under the Bill, in, which case any sums paid on account of a grant are to be repaid, together with compound interest upon them, Paragraph (d) provides that the liability of the owner shall be made a charge upon the house. What we are now proposing

to do by the two Amendments of which this is the first, is, that we adopt another procedure and give an opportunity to the local authority to go to the County Court and there obtain an injunction in respect of a breach of condition. We think that is a much better way of achieving our object, because our object is not to get back the money which has been paid, but to prevent the conditions which are imposed from being broken. By the later Amendment we preserve the possibility of getting the money from the individual who is liable in case the breach is not ended.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I must confess that I am not satisfied that the Minister by this Amendment is not weakening the claim which he has on the property. As I understand paragraph (d) he has the property as a mortgage for any sums that become payable or repayable. He proposes to drop that and to substitute for it a scheme whereby he will pursue the owner in the County Court for any liability incurred. We are opposed to this weakening of the security that the local authority and the State have upon their money, and we are opposed to these attempts to make it as easy as possible for the owner to get out of his liability.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 96; Noes, 239.

Division No. 535.]
AYES.
[6.54 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Barnes, A,
Cape, Thomas


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Barr, J
Charleton, H, C.


Ammon, Charles George
Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Clowes, S.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Bondfield, Margaret
Cluse, W. S.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Bromfield, William
Connolly, M.


Baker, Walter
Bromley, J.
Cove, W. G.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Dalton, Hugh


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles


Day. Colonel Harry
Lawrence, Susan
Stamford, T. W.


Dennison, R.
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Duncan, C.
Lee, F.
Taylor, R. A.


Dunnico, H.
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Darby)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lowth, T.
Thome, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gardner, J. P.
Lunn, William
Thurtle, Ernest


Gillett. George M.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon.J, R.(Aberavon)
) Townend, A. E.


Gosling, Harry
March, S.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Greenall, T.
Montague, Frederick
Viant, S. P.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenall, D, R. (Glamorgan)
Naylor, T. E.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Grundy, T. W.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wheatley, Ht. Hon. J.


Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Potts, John S.
Whiteley, W.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Purcell, A. A.
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hardie, George D.
Riley, Ben
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Harris, Percy A,
Rose, Frank H.
Wright, W.


Hayes, John Henry
Scurr, John
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James



Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.


John, William (Rhondda. West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Charles Edwards.


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)



NOES.


Albery, Irving James
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Dixey, A. C.
Huntingfield, Lord


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Drewe, C.
Hurd, Percy A.


Apsley, Lord
Duckworth, John
Hurst, Gerald B.


Ashley, U.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hutchison,G.A.Clark (Mldl'n & P'bl's)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Atkinson, C.
Elveden, Viscount
Jackson, sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Jacob, A. E.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M
Erskine, James Malcolm Montelth
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Falls, Sir Bertram G.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Bennett, A. J.
Fenby, T. D.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Fielden, E. B.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Berry, Sir George
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Bethel, A.
Forrest, W.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Betterton, Henry B.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Loder. J. de V.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Looker, Herbert William


Brass, Captain W.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Lord, Walter Greaves


Briant, Frank
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Briggs, J. Harold
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Ganzoni, Sir John
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Gates, Percy
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Brown, Col. D.C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Gilmour, Lt-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Goff, Sir Park
McLean. Major A.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Gower, Sir Robert
Macmillan, Captain H.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Grant, Sir J. A.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Bullock, Captain M.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Burman, J. B.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Macquisten, F. A.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Grotrian, H. Brent
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Cautley, Sir Henry s.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Malone, Major P. B.


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth.S.)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A, (Brecon & Rad.)
Margesson. Captain D.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hammersley, S. S.
Meller, R. J.


Christie, J. A.
Harrison. G. J. C.
Meyer, Sir Frank


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Clayton, G. C.
Haslam, Henry C.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Cope, Major William
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Moore, Lieut-Col. T. C. R. (Ayr)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hogg, Rt. Hon.Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Neville, Ft. J.


Crooke, J. Smedtey (Derltend)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Nuttall, Ellis


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh}
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Oakley, T.


Davies, Maj. Geo.F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hume, Sir G. H.
Owen, Major G.




Penny, Frederick George
Savery, S. S.
Warrendcr, Sir Victor


Percy, Lard Eustace (Hastings)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Perring, Sir William George
Shepperson, E. W.
Watts, Dr. T.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Wells, S. R.


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Asshcton
Skelton, A. N.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Raine, W.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wiggins, William Martin


Ramsden, E.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine.c.)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Smithers, Waldron
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Rcid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Held. D. D. (County Down)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden,E.)
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Remnant, Sir James
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Rentoul, G. S.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Streattelld, Captain S. R.
Wintorton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Rice, Sir Frederick
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Womersley, W. J.


Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Ropner, Major L.
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A
Tinne, J. A.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Titchfield, Major the Marquees of
Worthing ton-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Rye, F. G.
Tryon. Rt. Hon. George Clement
Wragg, Herbert


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.



Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wallace, Captain D. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Major Hennessy and Mr. F. C.


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave O.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Thomson.

CLAUSE 3.—(Conditions attaching to dwellings in, respect of which assistance has been given by way of grant.)

Mr. PALING: I beg to move, in page 7, line 3, at the end, to insert the words
Provided that an appeal shall lie to the Minister From any determination of the local authority under paragraph (i) either upon the complaint of any person or any person aggrieved, or upon the representation of any justice of the peace acting for the district that the rent so determined is in excess of the true rent., and upon such appeal the Minister, where he does not confirm the determination of the local authority, may determine the rent as aforesaid, and the cited paragraph shall have effect accordingly.
This Amendment means that an appeal shall be able to be made to the Minister if the persons concerned are not agreed that the rent, which has been decided upon by the local committee, is a correct one, and if they remain discontented they shall have the power of appeal to the Minister. I believe the reply of the Minister to this in Committee was that the safeguards were sufficient, and that if this were to be put into operation it would merely be vexatious. I do not think it is quite as simple as that. It may be that where at present a cottage is inhabited and is going to be improved, and where the 3 per cent. on the £50 is going to be added, it is a very simple operation, but I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman what would occur in cases like the following:
Supposing for the purposes of the Act there is an old barn which has been standing for a good many years paying
nothing and practically valueless. The structure is one which the owner thinks might be converted into one, two, or three dwellings under the Act. What is going to be the normal rent charged in case like that? It. may be that £150 or £50 for each dwelling is spent on it., being £50 out of the pocket of the owner and £100 out of the public purse. The Minister may argue that there is a limitation to the owner of 3 per cent. on £50, but, if the normal agricultural rent of the district—which may be 26., 3s., 4s. or even 5s. per week—is going to be put on dwellings like that, the 3 per cent. will have no meaning whatever, and it may be 10, 15, 20 or in extreme cases as much as 30 per cent. I can well conceive that in cases of that description there may be a lot of discontent as to what is the correct rent which should be applied, and, that being so, and foreseeing that such cases will occur, I feel sure we are only asking, in moving this Amendment, for something which is extremely reasonable. In such cases there is bound to be a lot of discontent arising as to what is the normal agricultural rent and I hope, in these circumstances, the. Minister may see his way to accept the Amendment.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: I beg to second the Amendment.
The Minister cannot complain, and neither can any other contending party, should any aggrieved person desire some ministerial intervention or inquiry where he may feel he has cause for complaint. I think that an appeal ought to lie to the
Minister in order to meet cases where any owner of property may take undue advantage of the provisions of the Act. The Minister ought at least to grant any person the power to appeal to him so that even-handed justice shall be meted out, in view of the contributions both from the ratepayers and the Exchequer.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If the Bill proposed that the rent was to be what the local authority thought to be a reasonable amount, then I think I should be disposed to agree that it was not unreasonable to ask that there should be some appeal from the decision of the local authority. But that is not what the Bill provides at all. What we have got in the Bill is the readily ascertained fact, namley, what actually was the rent of the particular building before it was improved; or, in the case of a building such as the hon. Member has spoken of—a barn or whatever it may be—which had not previously been used as a dwelling, the local authority is to determine what is the average rent for the time being paid by agricultural workers in that district. That is a question of fact which is readily ascertainable by the local authority, but it is certainly not so ascertainable by the Minister. Really, to give an appeal from the decision of the local authority in such a case would be to incur useless and unnecessary expense which ought not to be incurred.

Mr. WILLIAMS: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, in view of his statement, and the fact that there may be very few of these cases, whether in cases where a legitimate appeal should be made, the appeal ought not to be heard by the right hon. Gentleman or his successor?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member has rather missed the point. My remark was that no appeal was legitimate—if that be the proper word to use—or necessary in such cases, because the facts were all of them to be ascertained and could be most easily ascertained by the local authority on the spot.

Mr. TOWNEND: Supposing the facts were challenged, to whom should an appeal be made?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think we must leave something to the local authorities.

Mr. PALING: If that be the fact, is it not also the fact that in a case such as has been mentioned the profit to the landlord would not be confined to 3 per cent., and might be anything in the nature of what was indicated?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am at a loss to know what the hon. Member means by profit. It is not a question of profit. He seems to think that a barn or other building has no capital value at all. Why should he assume that? You cannot put up a barn without capital.

Mr. PALING: But it has no capital value until this money, which is to he provided by the State, has been spent on it.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I just want to emphasise the fact which has been pointed out by hon. Members, that it is quite easy to contemplate a case where a barn in its present state is of no value, but when you spend public money on it you give the existing ruins a value. It is not sufficient for the right hon. Gentleman to say, "Oh, hut he is limited to 3 per cent. on the amount of money he spends." As has been pointed out, he gets not merely his 3 per cent. on the £50 he has spent, hut the full average rent on the part of the property for which he is now getting no rent. I do not think it is such a simple matter as the right hon. Gentleman asks the House to assume, of ascertaining the normal working-class rent in a rural area. It is a matter that might present considerable difficulty, and all that is asked is that the tenant who is, after all, a very interested party in the matter, should, where he thinks teat a mistake has been made, have a right of appeal to the Minister. I think that is a very reasonable Amendment, and we shall press it.

Question put, "That those words he there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 111; Noes, 226.

Division No. 536.]
AYES.
[7.11 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Attlee, Clement Richard
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Barnes, A.


Ammon, Charles George
Baker, Walter
Barr, J.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Rose, frank H.


Bondfield, Margaret
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Scurr, John


Briant, Frank
Hardie, George D.
Sexton, James


Bromfield, William
Harris, Percy A.
Short, Alfred (Wednesday)


Bromley, J.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hayes, John Henry
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Cape, Thomas
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Charleton, H. C.
Hirst, G. H.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Clowes, S.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cluse, W. S.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles


Connolly, M.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Stamford, T. W.


Cove, w. G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Cowan, O. M. (Scottish universities)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Taylor, R. A.


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kelly, W. T.
Thorne, W. ('West Ham, Plaistow)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawrence, Susan
Townend, A. E.


Dennison, R.
Lawson, John James
Viant, S. P.


Duncan, C.
Lee, F.
Wallhead, Richard. c.


Dunnico, H.
Livingstone, A. M.
Watson. W. M. (Dunfermline)


Fenny, T. D.
Lowth, T.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lunn William
Wedgwood, Rt, Hon. Josiah


Gardner, J. P.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Absravon)
Welsh, J. C.


Gillett, George M.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gosling, Harry
March, S.
Whiteley. W.


Graham D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Montague, Frederick
Wiggins, William Martin


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Naylor, T. E.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield. Attercliffe)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson. R. J. Narrow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Paling, W.
Wright, W.


Groves, T.
Ponsenby, Arthur
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Grundy, T. W
Potts, John S.



Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOB THE AYES.—


Hall, F. (York, W. R. Normanton)
Riley, Ben
Mr, Charles Edwards and Mr.




Allen Parkinson.


NOES.


Albery, Irving James
Davies, Ma). Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Heneage, Lieut.-Col- Arthur P.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St.Marylebone)


Atholl, Duchess of
Dixey, A. C,
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy


Atkinson, C.
Drewe, C.
Holbrook, sir Arthur Richard


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Duckworth, John
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hopkinson, sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Elveden, Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney.N.)


Beckett, Sir Gar vase (Leeds, N.)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Hudson, R. s. (Camberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hume, Sir G. H.


Bennett, A. J.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Everard, W. Lindsay
Huntingfield Lord


Berry, Sir George
Falls, Sir Charles F.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Bethel, A.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hutchison, G.A.Clark (Midl'n & P'bls)


Better ton, Henry S.
Fielden. E. B.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Forrest, W.
James, Lieut-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Brass, Captain W.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Jones. G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Briggs, J. Harold
Faxcroft, Captain C. T.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Frece, Sir Walter de
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Buckingham. Sir H.
Galbraith, J. F. w.
Knox. Sir Alfred


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Ganzoni, Sir John
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Bullock, Captain M.
Gates, Percy
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Burman, J. B.
Gilmour. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Loder, J. de v.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Goff, Sir Park
Looker, Herbert William


Cadogan, Major Han. Edward
Gower, Sir Robert
Lord, Walter Grooves.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Grant, Sir J. A.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Herman


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt.R. (Prtsmth.S.)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Greene, W. p. Crawford
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart).


Christie, J. A.
Gunston, Captain D, W.
McLean, Major A.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hacking, Captain Douglas K.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Clayton, G. C.
Hall, Capt. w. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hammersley, S. S.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Cochrane, Commander Hon A. D.
Hanbury, C.
Macquisten, F. A.


Courtauld. Major J. S.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Haslam, Henry C.
Maklns, Brigadier-General E.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Headlam, Lieut,-Colonel C. M.
Malone, Major p. B.


Curzan, Captain Viscount
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.




Mailer. R. J
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Meyer, Sir Frank
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Ropner, Major L
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Monsell, Eyres, Com, fit. Hon, B. M.
Russell, Alexander West- (Tynemouth)
Ward. Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Rye, F. G.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Watts, Or. T.


Neville, R. J.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wells, S. R.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Savery, S. S.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Nuttall, Ellis
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon. Torquay)


Oakley, T.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Shepperson, E. W.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Skelton, A. N.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Penny, Frederick George
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Winterton. Rt. Hon. Earl


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Smithers, Waldron
Wise, Sir Fredric


Perring, Sir William George
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Womersley, W. J.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Wood. B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Raine. W.
Stanley. Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Ramsden, E.
Storry-Deans, R.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L


Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Wragg, Herbert


Reid, D. D, (County Down)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Remnant, Sir James
Tasker, Major R. Inigo



Rentoul, G. S.
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES —


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Major Cope and Captain Mar.


Rice, Sir Frederick
Tinne, J. A.
gesson.


Richardson, Sir P. W.(Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of

The following Amendment stood, on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. RYE:

In page 7, line 34, at the end, to insert the words
Notwithstanding 'the foregoing provisions the local authority may, but only in cases where the income of the owner or tenant has been increased since the date of taking occupation, waive the conditions imposfq1 by this Section.

Mr. RYE: I-intended to move a manuseript Amendment to the following effect:
Notwithstanding the foregoing conditions the local; authority may, where the income of the occupying owner or tenant has increased after the date of taking occupation, waive the conditions imposed by paragraph (a) of this Section.
I see on the Order Paper an Amendment in the name of the Minister of Health, which in substance is the same as my Amendment. In those circumstances I do not propose to move my Amendment.

Mr. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member propose to move to leave out. paragraph (c)?

Mr. RYE: No, Sir. I beg to move, in page 7, line 21, to leave out paragraph (d).
I move this Amendment because I see no reason why the occupier of one of these houses which comes Within the provision of this Bill should not have the
right to accept a premium on assignment or under-letting. The object of the Amendment put down m the Committee stage, which now appears in the Bill in paragraph (d), was to prevent an occupier under-letting or assigning to anyone who intended to use the cottage as a week-end residence, but the House will be aware that this could not be done under the terms of the Bill. The conditions imposed prohibit that, but I see no valid reason why a tenant who has improved his tenement, it may be the house itself, or what is more likely, the garden, should not be allowed, if he wants, to sell to another agricultural worker and receive a small premium on the sale. I cannot see what objection there is to that. I can see the reason for prohibiting an assignment which would enable anyone to come into occupation who was not an agricultural worker or someone in "the same economic condition." The assignment must be to a person of the same class, and, if the tenant can obtain a few pounds, I cannot see why he should be prohibited front doing so. Nor do I see why a neighbouring owner if he wishes to obtain possession of a cottage for the purpose of honing an agricultural worker should not be at liberty to pay a small premium in order to acquire possession. It may be that the tenant in occupation is moving into another county, and why should Le not make a small
profit? In view of the fact that the conditions are so stringent and make it abundantly clear that only an agricultural worker or someone of that same condition shall occupy the premises, I do not think these conditions should be imposed, and for that reason I move the Amendment.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I beg to second the Amendment.
I should like to know what was in the Minister's mind in putting in this requirement. It is absolutely clear by paragraph (a) that the succeeding occupier must be a person of the same class, he must not be earning any more than the standard rate of wages in the district. I cannot see any reason why the outgoing tenant should not make the best bargain he can with the incoming tenant, or anybody on his behalf. It is the constant practice now. Where you have a cottage with a garden, the outgoing tenant often has considerable interest in the garden produce; it all depends on the time of the year. Under this Clause as it stands, the outgoing occupier will lose that interest in his garden if he cannot be paid for the crops that are growing and the work he has put in. I can imagine similar conditions applying where the occupying owner has done up the inside of his house, whitewashed the ceilings or painted the rooms, and if the incoming tenant is willing to pay a few shillings or a pound or two, why should he not be allowed to do so? I do not know what the idea of the Government was in putting this paragraph in the Bill.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think I shall have much difficulty in showing why this paragraph has been put in, and why I attach some importance to it. The important provision in the Bill is that assistance shall be given out of public money to certain people to make improvements in their cottages, and in order that the benefit shall go to the tenant rather than to the owner we have imposed strict conditions as to the rent which may he charged for the improved cottage. If payment be made which is not called rent, but which is handed over to the person who is assigning the property, it is clear that the object of the Bill may be defeated. It is all very well for the hon. and learned Member to say it is the usual thing to ask a few shillings for the
condition of the garden or because the tenant has decorated the interior of the cottage, but he must see that it would be easy to put forward an excuse of that kind for asking a premium for the cottage, the real value of which has been derived from the fact that this public money has been spent on it. I cannot contemplate relaxing these conditions, for what it would really amount to would be, paying an increased rent. I hope the Amendment will not be pressed.

Amendment negatived.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON BROWN: I beg to move, in page 7, line 26, at the end, to insert the words
Provided always that nothing in this Act shall relieve the tenant from the obligation of obtaining the consent of his landlord before assigning, sub-letting, or parting with the possession of any house, message, or premises to which this Act applies where the obligation to obtain such consent as aforesaid is a term of the contract of tenancy, and where such an obligation is not a term of the contract of tenancy, it shall be the duty of the tenant to render the certificate required under Sub-section (1) (ii) (c) of Section three of this Act on any such assignment, sub-letting, or parting with possession as aforesaid.
In paragraph (c) it says:
The owner of the dwelling shall from time to time, on being so required by the local authority, give to the authority a certificate to the effect that the foregoing conditions (a) and (b) are being complied with in respect of the dwelling;
It may be possible that the owner of a cottage is unable to sign such a certificate or lice such information. In the case of a landlord having a lease which does not allow the tenant to sublet, this Clause may override the lease, it may enable the tenant to override I he terms of his lease. Then, again, when there is no lease or when the lease does not provide for sub-letting, it may be. quite possible for a tenant to sublet a cottage unlawfully and without the knowledge of the owner, and it should he on the tenant, as well as the owner, to make this report or sign this certificate. Take the ease of a farmer who changes his method of farming. He may change from arable to grass farming, and it may be possible that he will not require two cottages which are let with the farm. He may let them outside the farm. If there was no lease governing sub-letting the owner may know nothing about it, but he would still be responsible for signing the certi-
ficate. It should be clearly laid down that the tenant, as well as the owner, is responsible. Perhaps the wording of the Amendment is rather cumbersome, but the right hon. Gentleman has no doubt gathered the point at issue, and I hope he will insert words to make it quite clear.

Sir HARRY HOPE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: There are really two parts to this Amendment. There is the first part, which deals with a case where this is an obligation to obtain consent. There is nothing in this Bill which would override any such obligation. In regard to the second part, where there are no terms as to tenancy, I do not think we can substitute "tenant" for "owner." The best thing I can do is what I am prepared to do, if it will satisfy my hon. and gallant Friend, and that is to endeavour to have inserted in another place something to the effect that it shall be the duty of the tenant to give the owner whatever information is necessary in order to enable him to give a certificate.

Brigadier-General BROWN: We should be quite satisfied with that undertaking. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 7, line 27, after the word "that," to insert the words
(i) where a dwelling is in the occupation of a person by whom, having regard to the terms of paragraph (a) of this Sub-section, it may properly be occupied and that person subsequently ceases to he such a person the continued occupation of the dwelling by that person Shall not, if the local authority have assented thereto, and so long as that assent has not been withdrawn, he taken to be in contravention of the said paragraph (a), if and so long as that person remains in the employment of the person by whom he was employed at the time of his ceasing as aforesaid; and
(ii).
This Amendment is to provide for a case which I confess occurred to me only after the Bill was drafted, and it is rather a difficult case. It is the case where a man has been properly permitted to occupy one of these improved cottages, being either an agricultural worker or a person in substantially the
same economic position, and then has, by his own skill or industry, been enabled to take a better paid position from his employer. He would, if it were not for this Amendment, be unable any longer lawfuly to occupy his cottage. Assuming that the owner in such a case did not require the cottage for an agricultural worker, and that the owner was still willing that the man should continue to occupy the cottage at the same rent as hitherto—nothing in the Amendment would permit the, rent to be raised—it would seem rather hard that both owner and tenant should be put to such inconvenience that the man would be obliged, because he had raised himself by his own industry, to go somewhere else and to find another house. Therefore I have put this Amendment on the Paper. On the other hand I must provide against the possibility of a bogus putting into a house of a person who was not intended to occupy or was not eligible for a house of this kind—calling that man an agricultural worker in order to put him into one of these houses, and then raising his position. Therefore, I have provided that the assent of the local authority must be given to this waiver of the conditions of the Bill.

Mr. WHEATLEY: When we, in Committee, criticised this Bill because of the loose way in which it was drafted, and when we pointed out that there were certain dangers arising therefrom, we were repeatedly told by the Minister to read the Bill. It is a relief to us to find that he has now read the Bill and that he understands it. If the proposal which the right hon. Gentleman makes here were to be applied generally, it is one which would meet with a good deal of sympathy in all parts of the House. The idea behind the Amendment is to protect the industrious tenant who betters his economic position during his tenancy of a house. That is quite a worthy object, and if that were all that was in the Amendment there would be general sympathy with it. But that is not the Amendment. The Amendment provides that the man is to have this advantage only as long as he continues to be in the employment of the employer whom he was serving when he first became a tenant of the house. I submit that the right hon. Gentleman is altering the
whole basis of the Bill. The basis of tenancy up to now has been the economic condition of the tenant. The basis is now, to this extent at any rate, to be the convenience of the employer. That is quite a different thing. The Minister is altering the basis from the economic position of the tenant to the convenence of the employer. That is a step which we should not take. We should retain the houses for people in a certain economic condition, for whom they are intended, without any regard at all to the convenience of other people. The right hon. Gentleman has been fond of telling us that it is the interest of the tenant and not that of the owner which he is looking after. Clearly in this case it is solely the interest of the owner that is in the right hon. Gentleman's mind.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not attach any particular importance to these words, and if the right hon. Gentleman wishes I will leave them out.

Mr. RYE: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 6, to leave out from the word "paragraph" to the word "and" in line 8.

Major Sir GRANVILLE WHELER: I beg to second the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am prepared to accept the suggestion.

Amendment to proposed Amendment agreed to.

Proposed words, as amended, there inserted in the Bill.

Further Amendment made: In page 8, line 14, at the end, insert the words
(5) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment or rule of law relating to the jurisdiction of County Courts, the County Court of the district in which a dwelling is situate may, on the application of the local authority—

(a) whether or not any other relief is claimed, grant an injunction restraining the breach, or apprehended breach, of any condition applying to the dwelling by virtue of this Section other than the condition imposed by paragraph (c) of Subsection (1) of this Section; or
(b) make an Order directing payment to the authority of any sum which has become payable to it by reason of the breach of any condition applying to the dwelling by virtue of this Section."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 4.—(Government contributions to expenses of local authorities.)

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 9, line 4, at the end, to insert the words
and—
(b) if the local authority shows to the satisfaction of the Minister that, notwithstanding that they have taken all practicable steps for the purpose, they have been unable to recover the whole or some part of the sum which became repayable to them by reason of the breach of the condition, the Minister may remit the repayment- of the sum repayable to him under this Sub-section up to an amount not exceeding one half of the amount not recovered by the local authority.
If this Amendment were carried it would remove a blemish from an otherwise admirable Bill. At present in cases of default the county council has to bear the whole of the cost. If the Amendment is carried the Ministry will be able to meet them half way, by paying half the amount due. That would be fair to the county council and fair to the Ministry.

Sir DOUGLAS NEWTON: I beg to second the Amendment.
We attach considerable importance to this proposal. Considerable expenses might be incurred, and if the owner of the dwelling-house were found to be a man of straw the county council would be responsible for the whole of any loss which might then be incurred. That appeared to the county councils to be hardly a fair position in which to place them. The Amendment provides that half the loss would be borne by the county council and half by the Ministry of Agriculture.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: On a point of Order. Apart from the merits of the Amendment, is it one that can be moved on the Report stage, inasmuch as, by the showing of the Mover and Seconder, it throws, at least potentially, a charge on the State?

Mr. SPEAKER: I have just been thinking of the same point, and I would like to hear the Minister on it. It is a little complicated.

Major RUGGLES-BRISE: On that point of Order. May I quote from the "Manual of Procedure," which says:
A Clause or Amendment creating a charge on the public revenue, or imposing any tax, rate, or other burden on the people, may not he moved.
The Amendment would not do any of those things. A burden has already been placed on the taxpayer under the Bill, and it is now merely a question whether, if, in certain circumstances, the local authority is able to recover a sum of money from the owner, part of that money shall be allocated back to the Exchequer or be divided as between the Exchequer and the county council. There is no question of creating any further burden on the Exchequer; it is merely a question of intercepting a certain sum of money which might, in certain circumstances, come back to the Exchequer. The Amendment would not impose any further charge on the Exchequer.

Mr. SPEAKER: I would like to hear the Minister on the subject.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not feel competent to express an opinion.

Mr. SPEAKER: The thing is so doubtful that I must give the hon. Members the benefit of the doubt, and put the Amendment to the House.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: That being so, I would not like to deny the hon. and gallant Member who moved the Amendment the pleasure of having it accepted.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 224; Noes, 97.

Division No. 537.]
AYES.
[7.42 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Eden, Captain Anthony
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Ashley. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Elveden, Viscount
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Atholl, Duchess of
Everard, W. Lindsay
Knox, Sir Alfred


Atkinson, C.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Livingstone, A. M.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fenhy, T. D.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Fielden, E. B.
Loder, J. de V.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Looker, Herbert William


Beamish, Captain T. P. H,
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Lord, Walter Greaves-


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Bennett, A. J.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Human


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Frece, Sir Walter de
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Berry, Sir George
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Bethel, A.
Galbraith. J. F. W.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Betterton, Henry B.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Boothhy, R. J. G.
Gates, Percy
McLean. Major A.


Brass, Captain W.
Gilmour. Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Macmillan, Captain H.


Briant, Frank
Goff. Sir Park
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Brings, J. Harold
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Macguisten, F. A.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Grant, Sir J. A.
MacRobert, Alexander M-


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newh'y)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Bull, Rt. Hon. sir William James
Grotrian, H. Brent
Malone, Major P. B


Bullock, Captain M.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Margesson, Captain D.


Burman, J. B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Marriott. Sir J. A. R.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Meller. R. J.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Meyer, Sir Frank


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Cayzer. Maj. Sir Herht. R. (Prtsmth.S.)
Hammersley, S. S.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Sattron Walden)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Hanbury, C.
Monselt, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Mocre, Lieut. Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Christie, J. A.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Haslam, Henry C
Moreing, Captain A. H.


Clayton, G. C.
Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd. Henley)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Heneace, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Neville, R. J.


Cochrane. Commander Hon. A. D.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Nield, Rt. Hon. sir Herbert


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Nuttall, Ellis


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Oakley, T.


Cralk, Ht. Hon. Sir Henry
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
O'Connor, T J. (Bedford, Luton)


Crooke. J. Smedley (Derltend)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Penny, Frederick George


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hudson, Capt. A. U.M. (Hackney, N.)
Percy. Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Perring, Sir William George


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil)
Huntingfield, Lord
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hurd, Percy A.
Raine, W


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hurst, Gerald B.
Ramsden, E.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hutchison, G.A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bI's)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Dixey, A. C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Remnant, Sir James


Drewe, C.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rentoul, G. S.


Duckworth, John
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U


Rice, Sir Frederick
Smithers, Waldron
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Watts, Dr. T.


Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F.(Will'sden,E.)
Wells, S. R.


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Ropner, Major L.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Williams. A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Storry-Deans, R.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Rye, F. G.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Windsor-Clive, Lieut-Colonel George


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Tasker, Major R. InIgo
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sandeman, A. Stewart
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Womersley, W. J.


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Tinne, J. A.
Wood. E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Savery, S. S.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Shaw, Capt. W. W, (Wilts, Westb'y)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough
Wragg, Herbert


Shepperson, E. W.
Vaughan-M organ. Col. K. P.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Wallace, Captain D. E.



Skelton, A. N.
Ward, Lt.-Col.A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Major Cope and Captain Bowyer.


Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Potts, John S.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Ammon, Charles George
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Riley, Ben


Attice, Clement Richard
Groves, T.
Rose, Frank H.


Gaker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Grundy, T. W.
Sexton, James


Baker, Walter
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe),


Barnes, A.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Barr J.
Hardie, George D
Smith, Rwnnie Penistone)


Batey, Joseph
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Spoor, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Charles


Bondfield, Margaret
Hayes, John Henry
Stanford, T. W.


Bromfield, William
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Stephen, Campbell


Bromley, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Taylor, R. A.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Thome, W (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cape, Thomas
Hudson, J. H, (Huddersfield)
Thurtle, Ernest


Charleton, H. C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Townend, A. E.


Clowes, S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Viant, S. P.


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Connolly, M.
Kelly, W. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Cove, W. G.
Kennedy. T.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lee, F.
Welsh, J. C.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lindley, F. W.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lowth, T.
Whiteley, W.


Dennison, R.
Lunn, William
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Duncan, C.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Atterclifte)


Dunnico, H.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
March, S.
Wright, W.


Gardner, J. P.
Montague, Frederick
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gillett, George M.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)



Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Oliver, George Harold
Mr. Alien Parkinson and Mr.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Win. (Edin., Cent.)
Paling, W.
Charles Edwards.


Greenall, T.
Ponsonby, Arthur

CLAUSE 5.—(Local authorities for purposes of Act, borrowing, etc.)

The following Amendment stood on the Order Paper in the name of Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE:

In page 9, line 19, to leave out the words, "the council of the county or the council of the county borough," and to insert instead thereof the words
in the case of a borough, urban or rural district the council of the borough or district.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: This Amendment raises a very important question as to what local authorities are to work the Bill and before moving it I should like to draw the attention of the
Minister to a further Amendment on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Hurd) proposing to insert the words, "on application to' him by the council of any county district." Perhaps the Minister may see his way to concede us something on these lines and it may save time if we get some indication from the Minister as to what he proposes to do.

Mr. SPEAKER: A manuscript Amendment has been handed in from the other side of the House which may possibly, lead to agreement on this point, and perhaps it would be most convenient if, we discuss all the proposals before us at the same time.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I suggest it would be convenient that the discussion on the whole matter should take place on the Amendment of the hon. Member for Devizes.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: On a point of Order. The Amendment of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage) raises the question of urban and rural district councils being local authorities for the purposes of the Bill. I am anxious that this point should be argued in so far as it concerns rural district authorities, and, if the discussion is to take place on the Amendment of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Louth, I should like to second that Amendment in order that I may have the opportunity of saying something on the point, because if this Amendment were to go past without discussion I might be shut out.

Mr. SPEAKER: I think the Amendment which has been handed in by the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) will raise the whole question, and all points can be discussed upon it.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: I beg to move, in page 9, line 19, after the word "shall," to insert the words
in the case of a borough, urban, or rural district with a population of not less than five thousand, be the council of the borough or district and elsewhere shall.
This Amendment raises the whole question as to the authorities who are to administer this Measure, and, in moving it, I am fortified by the support of the Association of Municipal Corporations and the Urban District Councils Association. Moreover, rural district councils have communicated with me asking for an Amendment of this description. They argue, not without some point, that the local authorities, who have been doing something tangible in regard to the housing problem in their areas, are clearly the authorities to deal with a matter of this kind. Further, they say that local authorities must of necessity have a greater knowledge of local property owners and of the general health services in a particular district than it is possible for the county council or its officials to have, however much these desire to do the best they can under the terms of the Bill. Notwithstanding the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman in Committee, that it is
easier to deal with 61 county councils than with 1,700 local authorities, I think the Amendment ought to be accepted. The county council can still be made a go-between, connecting the Ministry and the local authorities, so long as the local authorities, who understand their own districts and the requirements of their own people, are given the power to operate the Measure to the advantage of the individual tenant and of the district. I understand the right hon. Gentleman has expressed his willingness to go some distance towards meeting the case made by the Association of Municipal Corporations and the urban and rural district councils. If he will be good enough to let us know his intentions early in the Debate, it may avoid waste of time. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be able to satisfy those Members who are supporting the urban and rural and borough councils in their plea for the acceptance of this Amendment.

Mr. DUNNICO: I beg to second the Amendment.
I am in the position of having had a fairly long experience both on a county council and on an urban district council, and I am the last person in the world to play one off against the other. I have never looked upon the county council and the local councils as being rivals, but allies. I welcome this Bill because, for the first time, it places in the hands of the county councils at least some opportunity of dealing with the housing accommodation of the people. On the other hand, whilst I should resent any proposal to exclude county councils entirely, I think it is equally drastic to try to exclude local authorities who are quite competent to deal with the question for themselves. I think in the circumstances the suggested compromise fixing a limit of a 5,000 population should be acceptable. It will enable the county council to do the work for those authorities which are perhaps not competent to do it for themselves, while it will leave those authorities who are quite competent, free to do it for themselves.

8.0 P.M.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I hope the Minister will be able to give favourable consideration to this Amendment. I lay the greatest stress on e having the rural district councils as authorities for carrying out the purpose of this Bill, to which I
attach the greatest value. I think the limitation of 5,000 population should meet the objection that in some parts of the country the rural district councils are too small and have too low a rateable valuation. Although I do not know exactly how far it will limit the rural district councils, I gladly accept, for this purpose, the limitation to 5,000 population. I desire the House to remember that in the recent three housing Measures the urban and rural district councils have been housing authorities. Under the Addison scheme, where there was a liability of something like £40 for each house for 60 years, the rural district council was the authority for putting that immense charge on the Exchequer. When the Addison scheme came to an end and we had the Minister's Act of 1923, the urban and rural district councils were entrusted with the power of arranging all about the building of these houses involving a subsidy of £75 per house and a further grant from the rates in the case of hundreds of thousands of houses. In the same way, under the Housing Act, 1924, when a much larger amount of money was allowed to be spent than under the Act of 1923, the urban and the rural district councils were the authorities for spending the money. I for my part can see no reason, when we have given power to rural district and urban district councils to build houses, why in the minor matter of making improvements to houses and bringing them up to modern sanitary requirements, we should say, "Oh, you urban and rural district authorities, that have done so well in building houses and in the expenditure of very much larger sums of money, you are not able to do this. We dare not trust you with this, and we must hand it over to the county councils." There is no reason whatever that I have ever heard why this should be done. It is within the recollection of the House that the utmost subsidy that can be given under this Bill in respect to any one house is £100. The total expenditure would be a mere bagatelle compared to the money that has been granted and spent under the Addison and other housing schemes. There are various reasons why the county council are not likely to be able to do this work. There is the considerable size of the county council areas, the considerable size of the counties in which the county
councils have administration. We never see a county councillor in my parish. When we live 25 miles or so away from where they sit, what can they know of the requirements of cottages which are hidden away often from the main road? And what do they know of the requirements of a village—one out of hundreds in the county?
The housing question, next to the Poor Law, is brought home most intimately to the working population. For that reason, we want persons in charge of this Bill who know the state of the local houses and local requirements, and who knows that better than the district councillors? In my division there is an area of something like 330 or 340 square miles, and we have only three rural district councils in the whole of that area. But the district councillors, coming from the various parts of this area, meeting in the evening, know all their districts thoroughly well. They are acceptable to the people who live in the houses, and who want these alterations. They are by far the most likely to work this Bill successfully, because they have local knowledge and they have the time to do the work. I say nothing against the county councils, because I like and admire their administration, but in my opinion they ought to administer the larger services, such as education, roads, the Diseases of Animals Acts, and matters which are common to the whole area of the county, and not those more personal and local matters such as I have mentioned. The county councils, as we know now, are already overwhelmed with work. One of the complaints I hear against the county councils is that they have so much to do that everything is being left to the permanent officials, and they are becoming most bureaucratic institutions. I hear this on all sides from county councillors. I hear further that there is the greatest difficulty in getting suitable men to take up the work on the county councils, because the claims upon their time, the number of committee meetings they have to attend, the distances they have to go, and the difficulty in getting to the meeting places are such that very few people can take office as county councillors.
We hear complaints that village life is not sufficiently interesting. The one fault I have to find with the present Minister of Health, although I admire much of the work he is doing, is that he does not show real sympathy with our country life, with
our country villages, and our country aspirations. He has destroyed our one little bit of local government which we had in the control of the overseers by parish councils. He has, by his recent Resolution, destroyed in great measure the provision of new houses under the Housing Act by the limitations that he has brought about in the subsidy. He is proposing, and he is likely to carry out a Measure to take away from our district councils the administration of the Poor Law, which he himself admits has been admirably done in our country districts, and I can see not the Minister but his colleagues coming forward when the administration of our rural roads is raised in this House and saying, "This can be very much better done by the county councils, and we will take this away."
The Minister has no real sympathy for district councils, and I ask hon. Members opposite and my hon. Friends here whether they really think that it is going to be a good thing to leave our rural district councils stranded, to concentrate everything in a body of officials in the capital town of the county, to destroy that interest which we have in local life, and to destroy the efficient and active rural district councils which, along with the parish councils, are most useful local bodies? He has left the parish councils with really nothing to do, and I am the chairman of a parish council. I would give the parish councils rather more to do. There is this danger that I can see, that the rural district councils are going to be left high and dry with little to do. This is the one body, as our rural local government is constituted at present, which is open to any man, whether he be a working man, a small farmer, a small shopkeeper or anybody, who lives in the county and who has any aspiration for public life. For these reasons, I do urge the House to put as much pressure as they can upon the Minister to reconsider this decision of handing this Bill over to the county councils, which I assure him, in my opinion, and I give it with confidence, will not be worked by them in the same efficient way as the district councils could work it. The district councils have the time, the opportunity, and the necessary local knowledge which will enable them to carry it out efficiently.

Sir EDMUND TURTON: I hope at this eleventh hour the right hon. Gentleman will not make a complete change in the Bill and take from the county councils this power which they are so eminently qualified to hold. I do not propose to follow my hon. and learned Friend the Member far East Grinstead (Sir H. Cautley) into the discussion on the merits of the county councils, but, speaking as one who has been a life-long county councillor, I can heartily agree with the view taken by an hon. Member who, I believe, has never had the privilege of serving on any county council in England. This Bill for the first time places rural housing powers in the hands of the county councils. Speaking as chairman of the County Councils Association, I say deliberately that we feel that we can play a very large part in the provision of housing accommodation. My hon. and learned Friend has suggested that we have not got the time, that we do not find the proper people to attend county councils, and that this administration would be entirely a matter for officials. I would remind him, however, that county councils have already had, under the Small Holdings Act., to provide houses and buildings. Under the Standing Joint Committees, we have had to provide houses far our policemen. We have skilled architects, and all the proper officials to assist those members of the county councils who are prepared to give the whole of their time to inspect houses in different villages when they have received the requisitions from these places.
I cannot help thinking that it might be a little unfortunate if these powers were given to the rural district councils, and to urban councils with the proportion of population that has been suggested. I think in many cases it may be rather difficult for owners of dilapidated cottages to come before the rural district councils. This does not affect me in the least. Thank goodness, I am able to keep two masons and three masons' labourers all the year round, and there is no question of me under any circumstances whatsoever applying to the county councils in regard to this grant, so I can speak with complete impartiality on this point. I think there is a certain danger in having the minor local authority as the authority before whom the people have to come
when they apply for grants under this Bill. Then what are you to do with regard to the charge If this Amendment is carried, are you going to place the charge upon the district area? Obviously, of course. Then that will upset the whole of the financial pro- visions of the Bill. Surely it is much fairer that you should do the work under the authority of the county council, and I hope that the Minister will not give way in this matter. This matter was considered very carefully by the County Councils Association. They undertook to carry out these powers. They passed a Resolution that they would carry them into effect, and I ask the House not to be carried away by the statements of an hon. and learned Member who, following the instincts of his profession, cannot do other than abuse the county councils and, indeed, abuse the Minister himself, and that is all the argument that he can adduce.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: I did not abuse anybody.

Sir E. TURTON: The hon. and learned Member spoke in a very derogatory manner, both of the county councils and of the Minister. At any rate, I ask the House not to change the Bill, but to leave it to the county councils, who, I can assure the House, will carry out the provisions of the Bill in the most impartial and fair manner possible, and can properly be trusted with the duties which are about to be placed upon them.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The last two speeches that we have heard show what angry passions may be aroused in attempting to deal with the limits of jurisdiction between county and district councils. The hon. Member for Consett (Mr. Dunnico) who seconded the Amendment, described it as a compromise, but it is a curious sort of compromise which is going exactly to reverse the proposal in the Bill and make the minor authorities the authorities which are to work the provisions of the Bill, instead of the county councils. I cannot help thinking that a great deal of the misapprehension which is shown upon this matter arises from the fact that hon. Members, not in one part of the House only, cannot get out of their heads the idea that it is the local authority which is going to do the work under the Bill. My hon. and
learned Friend the Member for East Grinstead (Sir H. Cautley) argued as if that was so, and said: "We have done this work; we know the requirements of the locality." All that is on the assumption that it is "we," the district councils, who are to do the work. But it is not for the district councils, or even for the county councils, to find out what are the requirements of a locality.

Sir H. CAUTLEY: The Amendment calls for the local councils to approve the plans.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: My hon. and learned Friend has not got clear in his mind what the local authorities have to do. It is the owners who will put their proposals forward. What the local authority has to do is to consider whether those proposals are going to make a satisfactory dwelling, but they do not need to inquire into the circumstances of the district to find that out. The architect of the county council can tell that at once. Then they have to consider whether the improvements proposed are the best that can be made, or whether there is something else that ought to be there and is not there, and they have to consider whether the improvements are such as they ought to approve, and whether the estimates that are given in connection with the proposals are such as can be accepted by them. Those are matters which do not require special local knowledge. They are matters which can be carried out perfectly well by the county council, more especially as there is only a limited number of houses which are ever going to be touched by this Bill, and as there is a period of five years during which the Bill is to be carried out. Therefore, I do not accept the point of view that you require special local knowledge, and that because the county councillors meet, when they do meet, a long way away from the place where the operations are to be carried out, they are incapable of supervising the work.
But there is another point, which is certainly a very important one, and it was touched upon by my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Sir E. Turton). There is the question of the charge, and if one of these smaller local authorities is to be the authority under the Bill, then the cost of any work undertaken in its area must fall entirely upon
that local authority. I should regard that as a very dangerous feature. I think the result of that would be that in many localities you would get nothing done, and I must say, too, that I have heard with some concern the argument on the part of certain boroughs that, as they have practically no buildings in their areas which are capable of being improved in this way, therefore they ought to be exempted from bearing any of the cost. I should be very sorry to hear that argument pressed by the councils of boroughs, and I do not think they would, on consideration, because, apart from the question as to whether the boroughs have not themselves an indirect, if not a direct, interest in seeing that the conditions are improved in the country, and that people are, therefore, induced rather to remain in the country than to come and compete in the towns—quite apart from that—I would draw attention again to what I mentioned in Committee, namely, that this is not the only case that will ever arise as to the spreading of charges over a large area like that of a county, and that it might very conceivably happen that in the future a precedent might be set for the separation of a particular case which might work out very much more to the disadvantage of the boroughs than this would work out to their advantage now.
Therefore, I feel myself that the desirable course is to spread these charges over as wide an area as possible. I think we are much more likely to get the work done, and, again, there is the argument, which has appealed to me, that if a particular district in a county finds that another district in the county is doing a good deal of work under the Bill, and that it, therefore, is contributing to the expenses of that other district, it will be inclined to say: "Well, at any rate we have to pay for somebody else's work, so let that somebody else pay for ours," and it will be tempted, in order that it may not be entirely on the debit side, to start work in its own district too. I could not accept the Amendment which has been moved by the hon. Member opposite, but I would point out to the House that the first three lines of this Sub-section are followed by a proviso, which enables the Minister in certain cases to substitute the council of a county district for the
council of the county. Before doing so, it is provided that the Minister must be convinced that it is a proper thing to do, and that he must consult the county council. It has been suggested to me by my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Hurd) and others that it would go some way to meet their views if I could make some further extension in that proviso, and I have informed my hon. Friend that, if he cared to expand his Amendment in the way which I have suggested to him, I should be prepared to accept the Amendment in that altered form. What I have proposed to him is that the first words of the proviso should read as follows:
Provided that, if the Minister, either owing to special circumstances or on application to him by the council of any county district made before the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-seven"—
Then it goes on, as in the Bill, with the words "thinks lit so to do." It will be seen that that alteration would allow this delegation, or rather the transference of powers from the county council to the county district to be brought about by the Minister on the application of the district, but there would he a time limit, and I think the House will see that it is necessary to have a time limit, because, if you did not, there would be serious delay on the part of the county council itself in making any scheme. It must know whether or not it is to be the authority before it can make its scheme, and, therefore, I have put in a time limit to enable us to save the next building season and to give the county councils some certainty as to where they stood within that time.
I think I need only add this. The alterations which I have suggested to my hon. Friend, of course, still leave the Minister certain discretion, because these words "if the Minister … thinks fit so to do" still remain in, and I want to make it quite clear that. I should feel it open to me to use that discretion, and I should not be disposed to think that if a council of a county district asked to be made the authority, knowing that had but few houses which could be improved under the Bill, and asked it therefore, in order to be relieved of a county charge, I could not accept that in itself as sufficient reason for making the alteration. I hope the concession that I
have made will be satisfactory not only to my hon. Friends behind me, but to hon. Members opposite who have themselves suggested that this might be a case for compromise.

Mr. GREENWOOD: I am afraid the compromise amounts to nothing, and I do not think my hon. Friend would be prepared to accept it. If I may say so, I do not think the Minister has been quite fair to our Amendment. It is in a. real sense a compromise. He says it is no compromise, but if hon. Members look at the two Amendments on the Order Paper, one in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage) and the other in the name of the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers), both those Amendments, in effect, rule out the county council entirely. That is their purpose. The first Amendment would read:
The local authority for the purposes of this Act shall he in the case of a borough, urban, or rural district the council of the borough or district.
It says nothing whatever about the county council. The next one says:
in the case of a borough, urban, or rural district the council of the borough or district, and elsewhere the county council.
In the Amendment elsewhere would be nowhere, because quite clearly the county area would be covered.

Mr. SMITHERS: I am sorry to interrupt, but the Amendment on the Order Paper is not in the form of words that I handed in. There is, obviously, a mistake in printing. Of course, "rural" should never have been in my Amendment.

Mr. GREENWOOD: That certainly does make it rather different, but the first Amendment as it stands rules out the county council entirely, and the second Amendment rules out every county council area except the rural district council area. There are many people, including the Minister, who want to give undisputed authority to the county council. That was his first intention. That is really what he means to do now. In Committee, he drew attention very ominously to the words "special circumstances," which led me to believe he would never recognise special circumstances, and that the county council would be the administrative body under the Bill, and that is all in keeping with his general
policy. This Amendment, of course, is a serious attempt to come between those two positions taken by hon. Members opposite, to say that in the case of the large local authorities, they should, if they wish, be the authorities, and that as regards the others, they should be left to the county council. That seems to us a fair and reasonable compromise between the two, because it is perfectly true that the County Councils do provide houses for policemen, but it is true, on the other hand, that the other local authorities have been in all respects housing authorities, and I must say that it is unfair in a Bill of this character to make a substantial constitutional change in the relationship between local authorities, which this Bill, in effect, does, and gets in the thin end of the wedge of the county council as a new housing authority.
The proviso which the right hon. Gentleman proposes to amend will not really meet our point. Provided the Minister is satisfied that there are special circumstances, and that the local authority can make a case, he will he prepared, after consultation with the county council, to permit that local authority to act for the purpose of this Act. I venture to say that that case will never arise, because the Minister himself has already hinted, as strongly as it was possible to hint, that these words "special circumstances" were going to he used by him to prevent small local authorities operating the Act, and this appeal means nothing, because we know his views on the subject, and, therefore, if I may use a vulgarism, he is trying to lead his supporters "up the garden." It does nothing whatever to meet their ease; it does nothing whatever to meet ours, and I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether, even now, the Minister is prepared to go a little further and do something to help the larger authorities, who feel very strongly on this matter. The right hon. Gentleman referred to the boroughs, and said they urged that they had cottages of this kind and, there fore, ought not to be called upon to pay. If I understand the case of the boroughs, that was not their argument. I know many municipal boroughs where there are cottages of this kind within their boundaries, but they are perfectly competent to deal with this Bill themselves,
and being large housing authorities, as many of these municipal authorities are, they ought not to come within the grip of the county councils in this matter. I sincerely hope the Government will be prepared to go a little further, and, if not, I hope that those on the other side of the House, who are opposed to the Government proposal, will follow us into the Lobby.

Mr. SMITHERS: As I have already pointed out, there is an error in the Amendment as it appears on the Order Paper. I only think that in fairness to myself it should be pointed out, because the Amendment as it appears there is nonsense. I think, if I may say so, I have a better opinion of the Minister of Health than the hon. Gentleman who has just spoken. I do not think the present Minister would willingly lead anyone "up the garden." Since hearing the words he proposes to move presently, I have tried to think out how they would work, and I am of opinion that he has gone a long way to meet us in our request, the point being now, that whereas before the county council had the complete control, now a local authority has got the right to ask that it he made the authority for operating this Bill. I, therefore, will not press any of my Amendments, and I thank the Minister for having met us in this way.

Sir D. NEWTON: I cannot help expressing disappointment at the statement we have heard from the Minister. I do not think he has, to any extent, met the case of the larger boroughs. The larger borough is, and has been, the housing authority under many different Acts, and it does feel under a sense of grievance at finding that the administration of this Act is to rest with the county councils and not with the larger boroughs. The case for the larger boroughs has become all the stronger now that a borough cannot become a county borough unless it has a population of 75,000 persons. The whole question of what duties are to be assigned to non-county boroughs will have to be reviewed in the light of the new legislation upon which this House has recently embarked. In a borough with which I am closely associated, more than half the county rates are paid by the borough, and less than half the representatives on
the county council come from the borough. That is the sort of case that ought to be met, and yet when that difficulty is put up it is brushed aside as though it did not exist, and the bogey is trotted out—a bogey which does not frighten me—"Perhaps a precedent will be established which will act injuriously to the boroughs on some future occasion." I suggest that each case must be dealt with on its merits, and on the merits of this case the claim of the boroughs has not been properly met.

Mr. LOOKER: Any one who studies the discussions which took place on the Second Reading and in Committee upstairs on the question whether the functions which are entrusted to authorities under this Act should be exercised by county councils or by district authorities must have been struck by the fact that there is a great deal to be said for both sides. After giving the subject rather prolonged study, I have come to the conclusion that if the Amendment of my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Hurd) could be accepted it would go a long way to meet the point that in proper cases these functions should be carried out by the district authorities. Personally I can assure the right hon. Gentleman opposite that after giving great consideration to the subject, I am under no delusions as to exactly what will be the effect of the Amendment which the Minister said he would accept, and I believe it will effect all that is necessary in the desired direction. All these district authorities view with great alarm a tendency which has grown up, in the last year or so particularly, to vest in county councils functions of a similar nature to those which have to a large extent in the past been discharged by district authorities. There seems to be a growing tendency to centralise these functions in the coanty councils, and, correspondingly, to take them away frown the district councils. To my mind that would be a very great mistake, and would constitute a great danger in our local administration, if for no other reason than that it would mend to deprive the community of the services of the people it is most desirable they should have. I hope that in all future questions of this description this tendency to centralise local administration in a county council, and to make into a sort of Ministry of Health, will be borne in mind.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 101; Noes, 194.

Division No. 538.]
AYES.
[8.41 p.m.


Adamson, Bt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Potts, John S.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Ammon, Charles George
Groves, T.
Riley, Ben


Attlee, Clement Richard
Grundy, T. W.
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Guest, Kaden (Southwark, N.)
Sexton, James


Baker, Walter
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barnes, A.
Hardie, George D
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Batey, Joseph
Hayes, John Henry
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bondfield, Margaret
Hirst, G. H.
Stamford, T. W.


Bromfield, William
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Stephen, Campbell


Bromley, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Taylor, R. A.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hurd, Percy A.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Thurtle, Ernest


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Townend, A. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Viant, S. P.


Clowes, S.
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead Richard C.


Close, W. S.
Kennedy, T.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Connolly, M.
Lawson, John James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Cove, W. G.
Lee, F.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dalton, Hugh
Lindley F. W.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lowth, T.
Welsh, J. C.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Whiteley, W.


Dennison, R.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Duncan, C,
March, S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Dunnico, H.
Montague, Frederick
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wright, W.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Murnin, H.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gardner, J. P.
Naylor, T. E.



Gosling, Harry
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Oliver, George Harold
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Greenall, T.
Paling, W.
Allen Parkinson.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Heneagc, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Albery, Irving James
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Apsley, Lord
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Dixey, A. C.
Hope, Rt. Hon. J. F. (Sheffield, C.)


Atholl, Duchess of
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Atkinson, C.
Drewe, C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Duckworth, John
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Edmondsan, Major A. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. u. M. (Hackney, N.)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Barnett, Major sir Richard
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Hume, Sir G. H.


Berry, Sir George
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis


Bethel, A.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Huntingfield, Lord


Betterton, Henry B.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Fenby, T. D.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Forrest, W.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Brass, Captain W.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Briggs, J. Harold
Fraser, Captain Ian
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Bullock, Captain M.
Gates, Percy
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Burman, J. B.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Knox, Sir Alfred


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Goff, Sir Park
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Looker, Herbert William


Christie, J. A.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Lord, Walter Greaves.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Clayton, G. C.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hall, Lieut. Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A D.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Cope, Major William
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
McLean, Major A.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hammersley, S. S.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish universities)
Hanbury, C.
Macquisten, F. A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Harrison, G. J. C.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Haslam, Henry C.
Malone, Major P. B.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Margesson, Captain D.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Meller, R. J.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Richardson, Sir p. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Ropner, Major L.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Watts, Dr. T.


Neville, R. J.
Rye, F. G.
Wells, S. R.


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Nuttall, Ellis
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Oakley, T.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Savery, S. S.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Pennefather, Sir John
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Penny, Frederick George
Shepperson, E. W.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Percy, Led Eustace (Hastings)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wise, Sir Fredric


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Womersley, W. J.


Perring, Sir William George
Smithers, Waidron
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. Westm'eland)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Raine, W.
Storry-Deans, R.
Wragg, Herbert


Ramsden, E.
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Tasker, Major R. Inigo



Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Remer, J. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdren, South)
Captain Lord Stanley and Captain


Rentoul G. S.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Viscount Curzon.

Mr. HURD: I beg to move, in page 9, line 21, after the word "Minister" to insert the word "either."
I propose also to move a further Amendment in line 22, after the word "circumstances," to insert the words
or on application to him by the council of any county district made before the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and twenty-seven.
The idea is to allow the Minister to delegate this power to the district council where he thinks the district council can best help in providing cottages at rents which agricultural labourers can pay.

Sir G. WHELER: I beg to second the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In line 22, after the word "circumstances," insert the words
or on application to him by the council of any county district before the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and twentyseven."—[Mr. Hurd.]
In page 10, line 1, leave out the words "any other case as part of the expenses of the," and insert instead thereof the words
the ease of any other council as part of the expenses of that."—[Sir K. Wood.]

Mr. J. HUDSON: I beg to move, in page 10, line 26, at the end, to insert the words
(6) Every local authority shall publish annually a report of their proceedings under this Act, and such report shall contain, among other things, the following particulars, namely:

1792
(a) The names and addresses of the owners to whom assistance has been given under this Act;
(b) The houses in respect of which such assistance has been given and the works to be carried out in respect thereof;
(c) The amount and nature of the assistance.
A copy of such report shall be supplied to any local government elector within the area of the local authority applying there for upon payment of such sum, not exceeding sixpence, as the authority may fix.
I think hon. Members will be agreed as to the reasonableness of this Amendment. After all, a considerable amount of public money may be used in this connection which may be for the benefit of private individuals by improving the value of their property, and therefore, it is a perfectly reasonable request that there should be very full information regarding the names of those who have been beneficiaries under the various provisions of this Act. I lay emphasis upon the provision that we should have the names and addresses of the owners to whom assistance will be given under this Bill if it is carried. Furthermore, I think the public in respect of such assistance should have a very full statement. I do not think that most public authorities need be pressed to do this kind of thing, but there is a suspicion abroad in this respect, and indeed from these benches we are aware that there are certain backward authorities in regard to whom we require an assurance on this point. It is with the idea of getting full public light on those authorities that I move this Amendment.

Mr. CAPE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Sir K. WOOD: I ask the House to reject this Amendment. I would like to point out that there is no provision requiring the publication of the names of those receiving assistance in other Acts of Parliament, and I see no reason why it should be done in this case. The Amendment would impose an unnecessary duty on local authorities, and, therefore, I ask the House to reject this proposal.

Mr. MARCH: Surely, if the Government want to be plain and open in connection with their transactions they ought not to object to this information being given by the local authorities to the Minister as to what work they have been doing. If we are unable to get any particulars at any time of what firms, companies, employers or householders have been receiving assistance for putting their houses in order by State money or by local money, the Minister of Health will not be able to give us the record which in the past he has been able to give us in regard to new houses. The Minister must at some time or other get particulars as to what houses are being built and he must get the names of those people who receive the subsidy.
If the Government are so much concerned as they profess to be about helping the agricultural workers or the rural workers, surely they will not mind the public knowing what employers and agricultural employers have been assisted to put their dilapidated dwellings in order. Seeing that the Parliamentary Secretary has already said that the Government cannot accept this proposal because of the trouble it is going to give, surely when an employer is asking for a subsidy from the local authority he will state how much he wants, and the local authority will know the amount of the money they have to ask the Minister for in order to make up the amount allowed in accordance with this Bill. It cannot cause a good deal of work to get out the information after it has been recorded. I am rather surprised to hear that the Government are not going to accept this Amendment, when they have been stating that they want to be open and plain and clear, so that everyone may understand exactly what they are doing. Here, when they are given the chance, they
start covering things up, as though they did not want people to know their deeds or misdeeds.

Mr. GREENWOOD: I should like to say a word or two on this Amendment. We have put forward a series of reasonable Amendments, which, however, have not been received in a spirit of generosity by the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary. The Parliamentary Secretary tells us that there is no precedent for what we are now proposing. I may inform him that there is no precedent for this Bill. So far as I know, there has never been a Bill similar to this put on the Statute Book of this country, and, if the Bill itself is without a precedent, the Parliamentary Secretary has no argument in the fact that no precedent has been found for such publication of particulars as we propose The position under the Housing Acts is not a parallel position in the least. It is because this Bill differs in many important respects from the old Housing Acts that we feel that these particulars ought to be forthcoming.
There is one precedent to which I would like to draw the attention of the House. If a member of an urban district council falls on hard times, and happens to be driven to the Poor Law, then, in the following March, when the urban district council elections are held, it is advertised to the world that that man is not eligible to stand as a councillor. Under this Bill, a person who receives assistance would be protected, but I am pointing out that, while the Government are not prepared to give publicity in the case of the landlords, they are prepared, presumably, to defend publicity in the case of unfortunate people who can no longer serve on district councils because their poverty has driven them to the board of guardians. It does seem that, where such substantial assistance is being given to private owners of houses for the purpose of putting them into a moderately habitable state, these particulars ought to be available to the mass of the ratepayers, whose money has gone towards the improvement of those houses.
The Ministry of Health will, no doubt, year by year include in its Annual Report the relevant particulars regarding the administration of this Measure. Local authorities will require to have in their possession all the information for which
we ask. That information will be summarised and sent to the Ministry of Health, and will find its way into the Annual Report of the Department. That is quite right; it is no business of this House to worry about the individuals who have received this assistance; but the fact that we shall be required to vote money certainly entitles us to know how and in what amount it, is being spent, and it entitles us to the Report on the administration of the Bill that will be forthcoming. Is it not equally reasonable to ask that the local authorities them-

selves should have their local reports presented for their various members and constituents? I think that, so far from this being unreasonable, it is an eminently reasonable Amendment, and I should have thought that the Government would, after due consideration, have been prepared to accept it. If they cannot, I am afraid we have no alternative but to press the matter to a Division.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 96; Noes, 203.

Division No. 539.]
AYES.
[9.2 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (fife, West)
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Greenall, D.R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.


Ammon, Charles George
Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Grundy, T. W.
Riley, Ben


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Sexton, James


Baker, Walter
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barnes, A.
Hardie, George D.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Barr, J.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Smith, H. B. Lees. (Keighley)


Batey, Joseph
Hayes, John Henry
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bondfield, Margaret
Hirst, G. H.
Stamford, T. W.


Bromfield, William
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Stephen, Campbell


Bromley, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Taylor, R. A.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Thurtle, Ernest


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Townend, A. E.


Clowes, S.
Kelly, W. T.
Viant, S. P.


Cluse, W. s.
Kennedy, T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Connolly, M.
Lawson, John James
Watson, W.M. (Dumfermline)


Cove, W. G.
Lee, F.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dalton, Hugh
Lindley, F. W.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Livingstone, A. M.
Welsh, J. C.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lowth, T.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Whiteley, W.


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Ab'ravon)
Wiggins, William Martin


Dennison, R.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Duncan, C.
March, S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Dunnico, H.
Montague, Frederick
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Fenby, T. D.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wright, W.


Gardner, J. P.
Murnin, H.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.



Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Oliver, George Harold
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Greenall, T.
Paling, W.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. T.




Henderson.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Albery, Irving James
Bullock, Captain M.
Dixey, A. C.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Burman, J. B.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert


Apsley, Lord
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Drewe, C.


Astbury, Lieut-Commander F. W.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Duckworth, John


Atholl, Duchess of
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Eden, Captain Anthony


Atkinson, C.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Christie, J. A.
Elveden, Viscount


Barclay-Harvey C. M.
Clayton, G. c.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cochrane, Commander Hon, A. D.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Berry, Sir George
Cope, Major William
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Bethel, A.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.


Betterton, Henry B.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Fielden, E. B.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Forestier Walker, Sir L.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Forrest, W.


Brass, Captain W.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Briggs, J. Harold
Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Briscoe, Richard George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Fraser, Captain Ian


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Frece, Sir Walter de


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Fremantle, Lt. Col. Francis E.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
McLean, Major A.
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Ganzoni, Sir John
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Gates, Percy
Macquisten, F. A.
Savery, S. S.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Goff, Sir Park
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Gower, Sir Robert
Malone, Major P. B.
Shepperson, E. W.


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Grant, Sir J. A.
Margesson, Captain D.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Greene, w. P. Crawford
Meller, R. J.
Smithers, Waldron


Grotrian, H. Brent
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Storry-Deans, R.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Hammersley, S. S.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hanbury, C.
Neville, R. J.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Harrison, G. J. C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Templeton, W. P.


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Newton, sir O. G. C. (Cambridge)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Haslam, Henry C.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Tinne, J. A.


Henderson, Capt R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Nuttall, Ellis
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Oakley, T.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Pennefather, Sir John
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Herbert, S. (York. N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Penny, Frederick George
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Ferring, Sir William George
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Watts, Dr. T.


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, [...].)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Wells, S. R.


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Raine, W.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Ramsden, E.
Williams, A M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Huntingfield, Lord
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Hurd, Percy A.
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Remer, J. R.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rentoul, G. S.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wise, sir Fredric


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Womersley, W. J.


King, Captain Henry Doublas
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dunley)
Ropner, Major L.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Looker, Herbert William
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Wragg, Herbert


Lord, Walter Greaves.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Rye, F. G.



Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, putney)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Viscount Curzon.

CLAUSE 8.—(Application to Scotland.)

The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. William Watson): I beg to move, in page 11, line 5, at the end, to add the words
'County Court' means 'sheriff' and 'injunction' means 'interdict.'
In consequence of the new Sub-section to Clause 3 which has been added to-day, in reference to injunctions in County Courts, it is necessary to extend the Scottish glossary of this Clause, and that is the purpose of this Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

The LORD ADVOCATE: I beg to move, in page 12, line 8, to leave out from the beginning to the end of line 6, on page 13.
This exactly corresponds to what has already been accepted, the Amendment of my right hon. Friend in Clause 2 to leave out paragraph (d). This is the Scottish equivalent to paragraph (d).

Amendment agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Mr. GREENWOOD: I beg to move to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof the words
this House, whilst recognising the necessity for and willing to assist in the improvement of much of the housing accommodation at present afforded to workers in rural areas, cannot assent to the Third Reading of a Bill which provides public money for the improvement of private property and for the relief of landlords well able from their own resources to put their property into decent condition, and which cannot he regarded as an acceptable alternative to the erection of new houses.
I think hon. Members on this side of the House have been struck by the different appearance of the opposite benches to-day and last Thursday. We have had a Division to-day where more Members opposite voted than on the occasion of the very important Motion for
the reduction of the housing subsidy, from which I can only conclude that to hon. Members opposite the imposition of a new tax upon the mass of the people in the interests of rural landlords is far more important than the reduction of the subsidy for the provision of new houses. I am glad to think hon. Members opposite have been a little more faithful in their attendance to-day than they were the other day, because it bears out a statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer not very long ago. He was good enough to criticise the programme of the Labour party relating to agriculture, and the Liberal land policy, and he said:
So far as His Majesty's Government is concerned, we are not able to associate ourselves with either of these hopeful plans. We cannot pretend, like those who have put them forward, to be entirely disinterested, because the country party, the landed interest, the great industry of agriculture, is one of the strongest elements in the political forces which we represent.
This Bill is a proof, and the attendance of hon. Members opposite to-day is a proof that in this matter they have a very special interest. It is unfortunate that this Bill should have come forward at a time when the Government has decided on the reduction of the subsidies provided under the Acts of 1923 and 1924. In order to satisfy "the country party, the landed interest and the great industry of agriculture," which is one of the strongest elements of the political forces that hon. Members opposite represent, they have provided a sop to the agricultural interest to compensate them for the reduction of the general housing subsidy.
The relief that is being given to rural landlords is a very substantial one. They may be provided with two-thirds of the cost of the improvements of their houses, or a sum of £100. Up to the beginning of October next year the Act of 1923 provided, out of public money, only £75 for a new house, and this Bill proposes to pay out of the public purse up to £100 for the improvement of an old house, and the author of it is the author of the scheme for providing £75 out of the public funds for a new house. A year hence that £75 is to be reduced by £50, and almost at the same time, while the new rate of subsidy is to be capitalised at £50 per house, the Government is prepared, in the case of a patched up and improved rural cottage,
to pay a public grant up to £100. Measured in terms of the value of the houses, it really means that in the case of a town house worth £400 or £450 the subsidy under the 1923 Act is, after the 1st October next, to be one-eighth or one-ninth of the value of the house, but in the case of this dofe to the rural landlord up to £100, that contribution may be one-half, one-third, or one-fourth of the value of the house. In other words, the Government are prepared to subsidise old, reconstructed and improved houses far more heavily than they are prepared to subsidise newly-built houses. If the same proportionate rate of subsidy now to be given by the tight hon. Gentleman applied to new houss in rural areas, the problem of housing in the rural areas would fairly speedily be solved.
To-day we have heard with sadness that the Government has now inscribed on its banner, "Working-class houses without baths and bathrooms." This is to be regarded as the Conservative standard of what are fit houses for workingclass people to live in. They have hitherto declared that they were, at least, in favour of a fixed bath. Two years ago, I was violently opposed by hon. Members who now sit opposite when I rose to move the Schedule to the 1924 Bill, and to add, after the words "fixed bath," the words "in any bathroom." That was done against the wishes of hon. Members opposite. But they have been responsible for a provision which requires a fixed bath to be put in the new houses. Within three years they have so far gone back on that policy that they are prepared now to admit that a house may be perfectly satisfactory in every way—that is what it says in this Bill—without a bath or a bathroom. We are glad to have that confession of the new housing police of the Government and the Conservative party.
We have had raised to-day the question of the authority that is to be responsible. We take the strongest objection to making constitutional changes in a Bill dealing with some social problem. This Bill may in the eyes of hon. Members opposite be an important Bill but, measured as Treat Measures go, it is a small Bill, and in a small Bill of this kind we ought not to have any far-reaching changes made in the relations between various types of local authorities. It is unfair to the
larger local authorities like the county boroughs and the non-county boroughs, and it gives to the smaller local authorities little opportunity to defend themselves, because naturally they are anxious to see rural houses provided, though they do not wish to see their powers being whittled away by the enlargement of the powers of the county councils. Our primary objection to this Bill goes much deeper than objections to specific Clauses. We are not opposed to the improvement of old houses. I would much rather live in many an old house that has been improved than in some of the new houses that are being built to-day.
What we object to is the method by which the proposed improvement of the old houses is being carried out. It is being carried out by the aid of a colossal subsidy. It is colossal when you measure it in terms of the value of the houses, while the houses are to be left not under definite public control, in spite of the provisions of the Bill, but still under private enterprise. I draw attention to the fact of which I reminded hon. Members on the Second Reading of the Bill, that the Minister of Health was Chairman of a Committee only a few years ago which dealt with bad houses, and which came to the conclusion that the only way to see that they were put right and kept right was to bring them under the control and ownership of the local authorities. That was what the Minister of Health said when he was Chairman of the Committee, before he had reached his present office. When I drew his attention to the fact, he said that that had nothing to do with rural housing. But a bad house is a bad house whether it is situated in a town or in the country. The dispersion of the property in rural areas makes public control even more vital, if the necessary improvements are to take place and the improvements are to be maintained, than is the case in the towns.
This Bill simply improves the value and improves the amenities of private estates and private property. It places the rural landlord in an entirely different class from the town landlord. I am no friend of the town landlord. But the town landlord has been harried by law into putting his houses into a proper state of repair. It is no use where there is a vigorous local authority the town landlord pleading poverty. It would not make the slightest difference. He would be required to put
his houses into a state of proper habitable repair. The town landlords, many of them far poorer than the poorest country landlords, are under the ban of the law if they do not keep their houses in a proper state of repair, without any assistance of any kind from public funds. They have the fear that possibly their houses may be confiscated and taken over at their site value without one penny being given for the value of the house.
Whilst that state of affairs holds in the town, the Government find a hundred excuses not to penalise the rural landlord, but actually to put £100 in his pocket for every cottage that he improves. There is no element of justice in that policy. If it he that the rural landlords cannot afford to put their houses into proper habitable repair, if they cannot improve them and make them conform to reasonable modern standards, they are bankrupt and they ought to be relieved of their responsibility. There is no case for giving them this substantial public subsidy to help them in their difficulty. It is not as though the landed classes, the country interests, have been poverty-stricken. In so far as they have passed through bad times, they have always found sympathetic assistance from Conservative Government after Conservative Government. The rural landlords to-day do not pay their fair share of taxation and they do not pay their fair share of rates. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] They do not. There are on the Statute Book provisions which exempt them from the responsibilities of other citizens. Whilst that is so, and we have a particularly favoured class of landlord in the country, this class is the very class to whom the Government now make this generous offer of assistance for the improvement of their cottages. This is an attempt on the part of the Government to give definite financial support to a class which is one of the strongest in the political forces which they represent. It is an unfair and an unjust act, a Measure of political bribery to a class of their political supporters, and it will do next to nothing really to solve the rural housing problem.
It is estimated that over 20 years £1,200,000 is to be spent. That will not solve the rural housing problem; that will not go one-tenth of the way towards solving it. But what is going to be the
position in the rural areas after this, when the county councils are given definite powers in this matter above the heads of other housing authorities? The subsidy is being reduced, local authorities are going to be discouraged, and they will be rightly annoyed because of the new powers given to county councils. The county councils will be left to deal with this problem of propping up the old cottages, and there will, as a result, be less new houses built in the rural areas. On any assumption, even assuming that the Government got the maximum out of this Bill, there is a need for an enormous increase in the amount of new building in rural areas, and our fear is that this Bill will be sufficient to salve the consciences of certain local authorities, who will operate it and neglect their responsibilities with regard to the building of new houses. However much we may wish to keep, and we ought to keep, the old houses that are capable of being made reasonably habitable, however much we may pursue that policy, it is quite incapable of meeting rural needs to-day. Therefore, because the Bill tends to stop the building of new houses, because it is a backward Measure, because it subsidises so heavily the improvement of old houses as against the subsidy to new houses, because it is a mere political dodge on the part of the party opposite to gain further favour with their agricultural supporters, I move this Amendment.

Mr. J. HUDSON: I beg to second the Amendment.
The Amendment expresses, not so much our view with regard to the needs of the agricultural labourer, but our view as to the unfair advantage that is now being taken of those needs by the friends of the party opposite. There was never any need why this Bill should deal with the agricultural problem in the way suggested. There was on the Statute Book, long before the Government thought of this Bill, arrangements whereby, had the Minister of Health desired to deal with all the unhealthy cottages in which the farm labourers to-clay are living, he could do so. There existed the Town Planning Acts and other arrangements by which rural district councils, or, if they failed, county councils, or, if they failed, the Minister
himself, would finally have insisted upon those repairs being put into operation which would give the agricultural labourer a chance in the unhealthy dwelling in which he may now be living. But the objection to that procedure in the mind of the Minister—I will not be too hard on the Minister, for I do not think it was in his mind, but in the minds of the friends of the Minister—the objection to that procedure would have been that the cost of those repairs would finally have been placed upon the rent that ultimately the landlord would have drawn. Hon. Members opposite will realise that, if this process had been carried out, the landlord and his friends would ultimately have had the privilege of paying, as they ought to have paid, for the repair of the scandalously unhealthy property in which so many of the farm labourers are living. We were fully prepared to have those sections carried out, but the Tory Government was not. It is for that reason that this Bill was introduced. We have had the spectacle presented to us to-night of the party opposite being so ashamed of what they are doing that it is not even to be made known what are the names of the persons who are to benefit by the steps they are now taking. The whole thing is a hole-and-corner business. It has never been dictated in any part of it by regard for the needs of the agricultural labourers.
I want very particularly to draw the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the argument which he addressed to us in very great detail last week regarding the effect of a subsidy upon the costs of the processes which this particular subsidy is intended to help. The Parliamentary Secretary, in his very great innocence, as I suggested to him in a speech I made last week, told us that the reason why the Government objected to the subsidy, when applied to new houses, was because that subsidy in the long run raised the cost of the new houses, and he told us that the way to bring down the price of buildings was to reduce the subsidy. Indeed, last week he had no other argument to offer for the proposal that the Government was then making. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he can tell the House to-night what effect the subsidy will have upon the cost of repairing property. Does he
mean to tell us now that landlords may get this help from the State, and thereby be assisted to pay out to house property menders the money that they would obtain from the State, and that the mending of property will not be influenced by that process which he protended would operate with regard to new property?
I submit that, as between last week's Bill and this week's Bill which we are now discussing, the Government are caught between the horns of a dilemma. They have got to decide quite frankly, if the subsidy raises prices, that it raises prices all round. If it be true that prices of new property have gone up as the result of the subsidy suggested by my right hon. Friend in his Bill and of the subsidy arranged for in the Measure that the Minister brought in in 1923, then, exactly by the same argument, the subsidy that you are now proposing to pay for the improvement of rotten property is ultimately going to operate in raising the price of mending that rotten property. You cannot have the argument on one process and then entirely forget it on the other process. I suggest that last week the Government was completely insincere in that argument. They have proved that insincerity to-day by the Bill we are now considering. In the interests of the farm labourer and the provision of decent cottages for them, as well as in the interest of public decency and honesty, I urge that this Bill should not be passed. This subsidy ought not to be paid into the pockets of those who have had the duty of attending to the cottages of their agricultural labourers, but who for years have left them with little better than pigsties in which to dwell.

Captain EDEN: The House, while listening to the last two speeches, will have readily appreciated how very sorely the Socialist party regret that they made no serious attempt to deal with this difficulty during their period of office. Finding themselves in that unhappy position, they do their best to make a travesty of the Bill we are now discussing. I do not want to deal with that to-night; I only want to suggest to hon. Members opposite, who, as we know, are kind enough to cast a friendly eye on the rural areas of England, that their best
policy is to see how this Bill works before they attack it if they hope to win any seats in rural England. The Minister of Health, in the Second Reading Debate, stated that our difficulties in rural England, our housing difficulties, were due in the main to two causes; first, to the fact that so many houses had fallen into disrepair, and, secondly, to the fact that a great many cottages in some areas have been diverted from their original purpose of housing the rural workers, and were now occupied by week-enders and other dwellers from the towns. I want to refer to that aspect of the difficulty.
In some parts of England the problem is becoming increasingly serious. Anyone who has any knowledge of ally parts of rural England which are close to any of our large cities will be compelled to admit that the difficulties in housing these areas have been almost entirely created by the demand which the town makes on the accommodation which should be available for the workers on the land. I shall carry the House with me no doubt in this proposition, that houses in rural areas should be available, in the first instance, for those who live and work upon the land. The Minister of Health will know a city, a very large city, which has shown a capacity to expand in an amazingly rapid degree. He will know the City of Birmingham, and in Warwickshire our problem is great because the City of Birmingham is expanding so rapidly. No doubt in other districts there is the same problem. We do not want to prevent the dwellers in towns coming into the country. Quite the contrary. They are very welcome. The more they come the better, but with this important proviso, that the country man must have the first call upon the houses available in the district.
In this Bill, for the first time, we have a proviso which says that for 20 years these houses shall not be let to people other than rural workers. This is the first step that has been made to meet that difficulty. The right hon. Gentleman, the late Minister of Health, increased the subsidy, but did not help our problem very notch because there was no provision by which the houses should be first made available for rural workers. This Bill provides for that. At the same time I must plead with the Minister of Health to go a little further at some
future time. This Bill deals with houses that are reconditioned, but even the proviso which keeps these houses for 20 years for rural workers will not in the near future be anything like enough. The problem is not getting less acute but more acute, and I plead with him that if the need exists and he cannot meet it without asking for more powers, that he should obtain these powers so that we can safeguard the houses in rural areas for rural workers.
We are all apt to indulge in a back to the land song, but it is in different melodies according to whether it comes from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), from hon. Members opposite, or from the Conservative party. But the first necessity, if there is to be any back to the land movement, is that the rural workers shall have some assurance that the housing accommodation is available for him, and that he will not lose it owing to his friends from the towns coming in and being able to pay a higher rent. The Government will have to take vigorous steps in that direction. The question is becoming every day, every week, more acute. We fully realise the difficulties of the housing position, and, valuable as this Bill is and heartily as we welcome the Clause which safeguards these houses for 20 years for rural workers, we believe that something further will have to he done if a really effective measure of reform is to be carried out to deal with the housing problem in rural areas adjacent to our great cities.

Major DAVIES: The speeches made by the Mover and Seconder of the rejection of the Bill were such a mass of fallacies that it seems entirely unnecessary at this stage of its progress to deal with them. I should like to bring the House back to what is the real problem and what this Bill is trying to do. We have had two housing Measures since 1923, the Act of that year and the Act of 1924, and, whatever those Acts aimed at doing, the facts of the situation are that they failed to touch the one problem with which this Bill, in a small way, is trying to deal. Those Acts dealt with the provision of an increased subsidy for cottages in rural areas where the tenants are not the ordinary rural agricultural workers whom
we have in mind this evening. The rents that have to be paid, on account of their cost, put them entirely outside the domestic budget of the ordinary rural workers, and the result is that, regardless of all the merits of these housing Measures, this outstanding need has not been touched. In fact, the situation, instead of improving, is becoming worse, because the limited supply of cottages in rural areas has been diverted, people other than rural workers are occupying them. With the development of the sugar beet industry this problem is further magnified in many parts of the country.
It is all very well for hon. Members opposite to point out the defects of the Bill, most of them based on an entire misapprehension of the Measure; but that does not help to deal with the crying need of the moment, which is primarily to safeguard these rural cottages for those who should by right occupy them, and, secondly, to bring them nearer to our modern standard of what housing should be for any worker. Those of us who are fortunate enough to live most of our lives, apart from Westminster, in rural surroundings can claim to have some intimate knowledge of this problem and how it presses. There is one point which has not been touched upon at all so far, and it is an important one. The Minister of Health in the Labour Government (Mr. Wheatley) prided himself, and not unjustly, on the fact that owing to his legislation a very large number of apprentices were being brought into the building industry, and he said that that increased the number of potential skilled craftsmen and labourers in the industry. Unfortunately sufficient time has not elapsed to enable those apprentices to become skilled workers. Anyhow, even if the numbers of available workers for housebuilding have been increased to any extent, the facts still remain that with the enormous need for housing the actual numbers engaged in the industry are not commensurate with the requirements of the country. There has been a competition between one local authority and another, and between one private builder and another, and that to a certain extent has been the cause of the tremendously increased cost of building.
With regard to the policy that is envisaged by this Bill, I am convinced that we have, so to speak, hidden away in
the rural areas of the country an unsuspected reservoir of building labour that has not been touched by the contractors who in urban and semi-urban districts obtain contracts for as many as 20, 50, or 100 cottages at a time. It is worth the urban contractors' while to contract on a large scale. They are conveniently situated with regard to railways and other conveniences, so that their costs can be kept down reasonably. In the rural districts, where cottages are scattered about in ones and twos and threes, those conditions do not exist. It is not practicable to get labour from the more concentrated and more popular centres of the country, on account of the difficulty of housing them while work is in progress. There are also the cost of the transportation of supplies and all the rest of it. In every village, however, there is a certain number of workers who are not included in the numbers that are returned as engaged in the building industry, but they are quite able to do the work, or a great deal of it, that is contemplated under this Bill. In the actual operations of reconstructing and rehabilitating many of these cottages we shall not have to call on the reserve building supply of the country, which is already fully occupied in putting up the houses that are being erected by local authorities or by private enterprise, which houses have all had to be let all rentals far in excess of those that the agricultural worker can afford to pay.
Therefore, not only shall we be reserving rural cottages for those to whom they should go, but we shall have available for the work of reconstruction a class of labour which in the past has been rather less sought after; and we shall not deplete the available numbers of builders and painters and carpenters whose time is needed for catching up the arrears and keeping abreast of the growing needs of housing. For these reasons particularly I welcome this Bill, not as a solution of the problem of housing to rural workers, but as one which promises more practical success than we have yet seen from the Housing Acts of 1923 and 1924.

Mr. MACKENZIE. LIVINGSTONE: May I, in a word or two, venture to thank the Government for deciding to give the benefits of this Measure to the most deserving section of our population, namely, the Crofters of the Highlands and
Islands of Scotland? I know no section of the population, in Scotland or out of it, who are so typical of all those fine qualities which have gone to make this Empire. No Member of this House who has any knowledge of the Crofter would deny this statement. Yet under all the recent Housing Acts these men have been completely and unfairly ignored As a Member of the Opposition I tell the Government quite frankly now that I have ample evidence from all parts of the Highlands and Islands that the Crofter will not only feel grateful for this Measure, but that he and his friends will do all that they can to make such use of it as will raise the whole standard of Highland housing.

Sir THOMAS DAVIES: I want to join in the appeal of the hon. and gallant Member for Warwick and Leamington (Captain Eden) to the Minister of Health with regard to houses in districts near the large towns. Perhaps an ounce of practice is worth a ton of precept. I happen to have in my Division, which includes nearly the whole of the Cotswold Hills—at any rate, 50 miles of them form the backbone of my Division—several very pretty villages, situated on the banks of the River Avon. I was there last year, and an agricultural labourer came up to me and made this remark: "What a d—shame it is that there is not a. single agricultural worker"—

HON. MEMBERS: Order, order!

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. James Hope): I understand that the hon. Member was making a quotation. I do not quite apprehend its meaning, but, as a quotation, I cannot rule it out of order.

Sir T. DAVIES: Had it not been a quotation I should not have dreamed of using it, but my agricultural labourers are not always over profit in what they say, and I wanted to give the House the exact words that the man used. I do not wonder that he used the language. This man said, and truthfully said, that there was not a single agricultural labourer living within two miles of his work, for the simple reason that every house in that village—it is a marvellously pretty village, Welford-on-Avon, 18 miles from Birmingham and four miles from Stratford-on-Avon, the most beautiful village in England, with a maypole on the village green, and so on
—is occupied by week-enders from Birmingham, who either pay a very high rent or buy the houses. He told me that the agricultural labourers have to live two miles away. The hon. and gallant Member for Warwick has very much the same difficulties. His Division is alongside mine. It is very hard to have to see men come out of the towns and get the cottages and turn the agricultural labourer away from the neighbourhood of his work. The agricultural worker has to get a house at a higher rent somewhere else, and has sometimes to walk or cycle two, three and even four miles to his work.
Everyone will agree that that is a hardship which ought to be abated in some way or other. As to how it-is to be done I can see that there are difficulties in the way. One cannot wonder at a landowner or cottage owner who has been accustomed to receiving 2s., 2s. 6d. or 3s. per week rent for a house accepting an offer of 7s., 8s. or 9s. per week, especially when it is accompanied by a promise to keep the place in first-class order. That does not however ease the situation for the agricultural worker. Therefore, I hope that something will be done to prevent these men being turned out of their cottages in order to make way for weekenders from the towns, simply because the week-ender has more money.
The next point I wish to emphasise is that the three housing schemes which have been introduced into this House since I became a Member in 1918 have done nothing for the agricultural worker. In 1918 we had a Coalition Government under the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), and we had the Addison Act. No one would pretend that the houses built under the Addison Act could possibly be let at rents such as an agricultural labourer could pay. Not one single house under that scheme, I suggest, has ever been let to a bona fide agricultural labourer. Then we had the Ministry of the late Mr. Bonar Law and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ladywood (Mr. N. Chamberlain) was Minister of Health. It is true that he gave a subsidy and that thousands of houses were built under it, but I do not know that a single house under that scheme was let at a rent within the means of an agricultural labourer.
Then we come to the Labour Government. I approve of and appreciate the steps that were taken to increase the subsidy for houses in agricultural districts with a view to giving the agricultural labourer a decent house at a reasonable rent. But I defy anybody to say that, even under that Act, the agricultural labourer could afford the rents which were required. I do not say so without knowledge. I have written to one of the biggest rural districts in Somersetshire and I have the figures for it and for a large rural district in Gloucestershire and for a smaller but important rural district in Worcestershire. I find that something like 500 houses have been built in these three districts under these various schemes and in not a single case has one of them been let at a lower rent than 5s. 3d. per week, the tenant paying the rates and this represents an average of 7s. 6d. a week. To ask agricultural labourers in those counties, where the wages are 30s. a week for day men, to pay 7s. 6d. a week, or a quarter of their wage, as house rent, is to ask the impossible. Nobody can deny that these are the facts of the case and I shall be glad to produce the details if any hon. Member desires to have them. I did find that in nine eases houses were let nominally to agricultural labourers, but the cheapest rent was 5s. 6d. a week and rates, and when I went into these nine cases I found that either the agricultural labourer in question had living with him two or three grown-up sons whose wages helped to pay the rent, or else he took in lodgers. I do not think it right that the agricultural labourer should be put in the position of being unable to live in a decent house unless he takes in lodgers which means more work for his wife and family and less comfort for himself.
10.0 p.m.
In view of the fact that these three schemes have proved failures in so far as providing houses for agricultural labourers is concerned, we are trying the scheme in this Bill. I have had considerable practice in regard to this scheme, even before it was thought of, and as that may seem a very Irish way of putting the matter, I may explain. I am secretary of a large friendly or benefit society which has funds amounting to over £300,000. I started the society, and have been secre-
tary of it for 37 years. We have advanced money to our members to buy and to improve their houses and to buy small holdings. We have hundreds and even thousands of small holders and market gardeners in my division. Scores of these people have bought their small holdings and their market gardens, and more still have bought their houses. The rules of our society provide for the men saving their money, and hundreds, if not thousands, of agricultural labourers and other workers have standing to their credit in the books of that society over £100 apiece. How the poor souls have saved that money God only knows, but they have done it. I have often said to one of them in regard to joining the society, "With your long family and your small wages you cannot afford to do it." But the man has done it and the most wonderful thing is that while we have from first to last advanced over £500,000 to men of the working class—not all agricultural labourers, but postmen, carpenters, masons, bricklayers, blacksmiths, paper hangers and a few agricultural labourers—in not one single case have we lost a penny piece of principal or interest. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] Yes, my friends—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] I beg pardon—they are honest people in the country and I ask hon. Members to bear that in mind. [HON. MEMBERS: "The labourers are!"] In a previous speech in this House I said that the agricultural labourer was the salt of all the Labour party; I say so still and I will say so to the very end. I am an agricultural labourer's son. My father lived in a cottage which had only two bedrooms, one opening into the other, and two rooms downstairs, one opening into the other, and he died in that house after an illness of two years. I am talking of what I know and understand.
Let us go a step further. If houses could not be provided under these three schemes because the costs are too high, are we going to fold our arms and to do nothing? I heard the discussions in Committee and in the House to-day and I have heard no one suggest a better scheme to provide cheap houses for agricultural workers than the scheme in the Bill. I have not the slightest objection to criticism if those who make it are prepared to put something better in the place of what they criticise, but no one
has said how otherwise you are going to provide houses. We are told that the landlords and the farmers could afford to do this themselves and ought to do it. Let us see. Six miles from where I live is what I suppose to be the greatest co-operative farm in England. It is something like 4,000 acres, and the Co-operative society bought it eight years ago. Every year since they have lost money "galore." They have lost more than enough to pay for the freehold of the estate twice over in eight years. And nearly every co-operative society running farms has either had to give them up altogether or has given notice of doing so or has shown on its balance sheet a loss on the farm.
If anybody doubts that, I shall be pleased to show him the publication which was published by their society proving that it is true. I have not known many Co-operative Societies that have built new cottages. The next difficulty is that, apart from the weekender, you find that wherever you have a country village from four to seven miles from a town the postman, the railwayman, the telegraphist, the motor cycle man and others get on their cycles and take those houses in the country at big rents. We are told that the landlord cught to provide houses for the agricultural workers; but he has done that in the past. I have known over and over again where landowners have shut down their houses to go and live in flats, because out of the rents they were getting they could not keep their places up, but they were determined to see that the labourers were properly housed. [Laughter.] I will make this sporting offer to hon. Gentlemen opposite that, if any six of them will come into my Division, I will take them to village after village, not in a model parish but in an ordinary parish, and they shall see for themselves how well the gentlemen of England have done for the people. You will remember that I am talking of things that I know. I do not farm, I do not own an inch of land; six feet by two is the only land I am ever likely to have; I am not under any obligation to any landowner, farmer or labourer, but. I am speaking from a detached point of view.
Take the point we have heard to-night over and over again, that you are to
give a certain amount of money to the landlords. I wonder how many of you are aware that the cottages which have gone out of occupation are, 19 times out of 20, not owned by rich landowners, but by poor people. It has been my experience hundreds of times that a small village shopkeeper, the baker or the little grocer, who also keeps the post office and sells drapery as well, saves money and buys houses in his village. He has to mortgage them, as I know, for I have got hundreds of deeds. This man dies, leaving his widow to carry on the business. It often happens that these cottages go from bad to worse until I have known them become uninhabitable. These are the people who will he encouraged by the Bill if there is any encouragement in it at all. When you are giving subsidies for housebuilding—I think the Minister says they average some £75 to £300 for a house—but there is nothing in the three Housing Bills stating that the man shall not sell the house at a profit, or stating what rent he shall let them for. Men build two or three of these houses, and about three months after they have done so and have the mortgages completed, they will come to me and say, "I have sold one, can you detach it from the other?" He tells me what it cost him and what profit he has sold it for, and when I ask him if he had paid the money back to the subsidy people, he says, "Oh dear, no; I put it in my pocket." But the man under this Bill cannot sell his house at profit. This Bill says, what no other Bill has said, that the rent shall be such as an agricultural labourer or someone in a similar position can pay. That being so, I do not think it lies in the mouth of anyone on any side of the House to say that you are making a present to the landlord if you compare his position with that of the man who took the subsidy to build a private house and then sold it. The man who had the subsidy is ten times better off than the landlord under this Bill.
Secondly, do remember that it was time something of the sort was done. In my work as Secretary to this particular friendly society, over and over again I have gone sick visiting. I went some years ago to see an old gentleman on his deathbed, and I said to him, "What, in
the world, have you got that umbrella over your bed for?" He said, "You stand and look at the top of the umbrella." I looked, and I saw that the top of the umbrella was covered with snow. As that poor labourer lay dying, I could look up through the tiles of the roof and could see the sky, and that umbrella literally had snow upon it. That that should happen in a Christian land was a disgrace. [Hoy. MEMBERS: "The gentlemen of England" and "Land of Hope and Glory!"] That is a very senseless thing to say. You will ask who owned the house, and you will say it was a rich landowner. The man who owned the house was one of the poorest of the poor, and, had this Bill been in existence then, he could possibly have repaired it.

Mr. GARDNER: What village was the house in?

Sir T. DAVIES: If you come with me, I will show you the village. I will motor you to the house and give you a jofly good luncheon besides. I agree very much with what was said by one hon. Member about village amenities. I live on the Cotswold hills, as I have said. We are very proud of our old Cotswold hills and villages and lanes, and we are very proud indeed of our cottages, because they are some of the most solidly-built houses you ever saw. Most of these houses, if they are reconditioned, will last twice as long as your jerry-built houses of to-day. They are warmer and stronger. We are very pleased to see visitors from all our large towns coming out in chars-a-bane to look at these places, and we want to preserve them in that state, so that we shall not have, along with a good old-fashioned stone-built house, some hideous red brick or iron erection, because if we do, it will spoil, not only the amenities of the place, but the pleasure of those men and women who, thank goodness, to-day are able to take a half-day off and come in their chars-a-bane and run all over the place. I thank the House for listening to me, but I feel very strongly on this question, and I say that unless you put something better in place of this Bill, I do not think you ought to be hard upon it.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I do not propose to stand long between the House and the Division which will bring our discussion
to a termination, but I wish to take up a few moments of its time particularly in dealing with points that have been raised or suggested by the two very interesting speeches to which we have just listened from the other side of the House. I liked the speech of the hon. and gallant Member for Yeovil (Major Davies) for its optimism, and I enjoyed the speech of the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Sir T. Davies) for its honesty. One hon. Member told us, when he rose, that be had one or two new points to put before the House. I cannot claim, having gone through these discussions both in the House and in the Committee, to have much that is new to say at this stage of the discussion. But the honesty of the hon. Member to whose enlightening speech we have just listened was really charming. At one stage, in a moment of forgetfulness, he addressed us as friends, but he immediately hastened to apologise. He withdrew the term "friends," and he addressed us for what we are.

Sir T. DAVIES: May I say why I did that? It is because in the last speech in which I addressed the House as "My friends," the Deputy-Speaker called me to order.

Mr. WHEATLEY: The tone of the speeches Lo which we have listened from the other side was that the housing conditions in the agricultural areas are lamentably bad and that no party has been able to do anything substantial to improve them. Reference has been made to houses erected under the Addison scheme. At any rate, the Addison housing policy, whatever may be said against it, did erect houses in the agricultural areas. Under the Act of 1924, we have been told by the Minister of Health, some 8,000 houses have been sanctioned for erection in the sparsely populated agricultural parishes, and something like 3,000 of these have been actually completed. Therefore, we can say that we have done something to provide new houses in the agricultural areas, but no Member has been able to rise on the other side and say that, for letting purposes at any rate, houses have been erected under the Act passed by the present Minister of Health, and it comes badly, I submit, from those who have not been able to do anything in the way of erecting new houses, to blame those of
us who have contributed something to the improvement of the agricultural districts by the erection of some thousands of houses.
We are told that these houses are of very little use, because they do not come within the budget of the agricultural labourer. No one would argue that the houses erected under any of the schemes are too good for any useful section of the British population. They are not mansions, they are not what we are accustomed to call villas, they are not houses that in any way betoken wealth, but they are houses which are not within the renting power of the agricultural labourer. They do not, in the language of the party opposite, come within that gentleman's Budget. We did not fix the Budget. That Budget has been fixed mainly by the supporters of the party opposite, and when they come and tell us that a house, which they condemned as inadequate when I was promoting the Bill of 1924, is too large, too costly, for the man who maintains the industry which is the basis of all our industry—the agricultural industry—because it does not come within the spending power of the agricultural labourer, then we say it is not the house to blame, but the wages which the agricultural labourer receives.
I put it to the party opposite that you cannot go on for ever living on a second-hand housing policy, and that is what you are proposing here. Having reached a stage where the wages paid to the agricultural labourer do not admit of his renting a house erected under any housing scheme approved by Parliament, V011 then come forward and tell us to live on the second-hand houses. The hon. Member drew a pathetic picture of the tenant of a house that he found inside his dwelling dying in the snow. Is it necessary for me to remind him that that is the description of England after centuries of Conservative government, and that it is that system of government which, after centuries, has given us these conditions that comes forward now and asks us to believe that the future greatness of England is safe in their hands? At one point we were told that the agricultural labourer could save £100. I wondered whether he should not be prosecuted. I think the agricultural labourer, who, out of the wages that we know he receives for Ns services, has
saved £100, has not done full justice to himself and his family, because I do not think anyone in this House would say that it was extravagant living to spend the amount weekly which is received by an agricultural labourer.
We are told that this is a Bill which is not going to help landlords. We have the usual pathetic picture of the owner of house property being a widow or orphan struggling in a country district, after passing her years in the post office of a little grocer's shop, and trying to eke out a living through running dilapidated property, until she succumbs under the burden imposed. We do not meet these property owners in real life. It has been suggested that this is not a Bill that is intended to, or is likely to, help the owner of existing property of a questionable kind in the agricultural areas. The Minister of Health has frequently pointed to its financial provisions, and has reasoned this way: There is the existing house, and we are going to spend upon it a maximum of £150. The local authority and the State will be responsible for two-thirds of that sum, and the owner will contribute his quota of £50. When you come to fix the rent, the owner will only be entitled to charge the existing rent plus 3 per cent. on the money he has invested, and that means he will be able to increase his rent by only 30s. a year, or something like 7d. a week. It does not seem as if he were going to make a fortune out of that transaction. But we have heard a good deal during these discussions of buildings that may spoil the amenities of a locality by having tin hats put on them, to the annoyance of neighbouring dwellers. These are not the existing dwelling-houses contemplated in speeches to which we have just listened.
I think it was the last speaker who warned us that we ought not to allow our enthusiasm for the housing of the agricultural labourer to lead us into the erection of houses where they will spoil the amenities of people who are comfortably housed now. We are not going to erect any new houses. We are to deal with existing buildings. Those who talk about amenities forget that. We are not bringing into a district anything substantially new in the way of buildings. We are going to repair old dwelling houses or to reform existing structures of
one kind or another. I take it from the amount of money that is to be spent that, speaking generally, the alterations will be in the internal arrangements of the house, more so than the external; but the point I want to make is that the only new thing we are bringing into these districts is the working class.
The building is there already. At present it is not occupied, but when it has been renovated we bring in the agricultural labourer. He is a very fine fellow in his own place, but his own place is not on the threshold of middle-class houses, and so the amenities of a middle-class district have to he protected, and we have to see that the agricultural labourer is housed where he will not annoy his betters.
Let me return to the point about the potential financial advantage to be gained from this Bill by the owners of old property in the rural districts. It is wrong to assume that the only additional income which the owner can possibly obtain through this Bill is 7d. a week, representing 3 per cent. on the £50. The old buildings to which reference has been made have no financial value at the moment. It is all very well to say there is no building which is not of value, but they have no renting value. The owner of the house, the poor widow, can no longer let the house, because it is not in a fit state for human habitation, and so the house brings the poor widow no income, and the house which brings her no income has no value. Then you proceed and spend £150 on that house. The widow spends her £50 and the £100 comes out of the public purse. Is the widow going to get only 7d. a week? Remember that you are giving a fresh value to the ruins, and in future the building is not going to be valued at £150, but at £150 plus whatever value has been given to the whole structure by the expenditure of the new money. Therefore, the widow receives not only the 7d. per week on her £50, but a comparatively substantial rent out of the ancient part of the buildings from which she does not now receive a penny. All over the rural districts you will have that state of things, and have many people getting a sum of money out of the expenditure which we have just voted.
I only want to say, in conclusion, one thing, if I may be allowed to repeat, a
thing I said during the Debate on the Money Resolution. I wish the House to believe that, like nearly every one of its Members, I have a very kindly feeling for the agricultural population, and it is not confined to the agricultural labourers. I realise perhaps more than most people how during the development of industrial capitalism during the 19th century British agriculture was ruined. I do not go the length of saying that either landlords or farmers find any particular pleasure in the conditions under which they are compelled to keep their agricultural labourers. I believe that to some extent, like the labourers, they are the victims of a wrong national policy. I wish we could see a bright future for British agriculture, and it is difficult to take that view now for the British nation.
We do, however, take a hopeful view, and we think there is a future for agriculture. We think you should be more optimistic than you now appear to be, and we are not the enemies of the countryside. We visualise a state of society in which you have a happy and prosperous peasantry providing to a larger extent than now for the needs of the people of Britain. In taking that view we think you should look ahead. We ask you to look ahead 50 or 60 years and we tell you the line you ought to have taken to help British agriculture was not to cut down your expenditure on new houses in order that you might expend more on the patching up of old houses. We say that you should try to lay down a new England and a new basis of society for the agricultural labourers, and for the other industries which they support.
I submit that that should particularly he the policy of a Conservative Government and not the present one of patching up old buildings and saying it is not worth while erecting new houses and that you cannot pay this and that. That policy is wrong. As things stand now hon. Members are only correct in the sense that if the labourer paid all his wages he could not meet the economic rent of a decent healthy dwelling. We must give the labourer a decent dwelling if we are to maintain him and the industry on which he depends. I am not speaking in a party sense when I ask the party opposite to take a more
generous view of the requirements of our rural areas in their arrangements for expenditure on the necessaries of life.

Sir K. WOOD: We have just heard a characteristic speech from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley), and, if I may say so, one typical of the attitude of the Labour party to these proposals—suspicion, jealousy—[Interruption]—misconception, and, if I may say so, an apprehension concerning their political prospects, arising as a result of the introduction of this Measure, rather than consideration of and endeavour to meet the needs of the agricultural workers. I have said that there are considerable misconceptions, which have been illustrated by the speech to which the House has just listened. Let me just refer to two of them, because I only propose to speak for a few minutes. The right hon. Gentleman assumed that this scheme was an alternative to the various housing schemes which are now in operation. This scheme, however, is an addition to what is still going on in various parts of England to-day. It is a provision for assisting the housing programme which is now in existence, and it is a very necessary addition to that programme, because the right hon. Gentleman has not been able to displace the fact that, notwithstanding the very considerable additional subsidy that was given under what we know as the Wheatley Act of 1924, it is perfectly true to say that the erection of new houses in rural areas is proceeding but slowly, on account of the high costs and the prevailing condition of high rents. Without in any way intending to be offensive to the right hon. Gentleman, I think he would agree that very few of the houses that have been erected under his scheme are available, so far as rents are concerned, to the agricultural workers of this country.
One of the advantages of this Bill is that it in no way interferes with any existing programme which may now be in operation, and, as an hon. Friend of mine has reminded the House this evening, it does not interfere in any way with existing building labour, but brings in a class of labour which I believe will be available, and which will assist in the immediate and early erection of these new dwellings both cheaply and quickly. The right
hon. Gentleman, and a good many hon. Members who have spoken, have attacked this Bill chiefly on the ground that it is an advantage to the owner of property in this country. The right hon. Gentleman gave an illustration to-night of the circumstances which might arise if an Ad building, which was not now used as a dwelling, was made available under the working of this Bill—if the money was spent upon it, and by that means further housing accommodation was made available. I am quite prepared to meet the right hon. Gentleman on that point. I say to the House that if, by the expenditure of money on a building of that kind, we can make available for the agricultural workers of this country further housing accommodation, I am not, myself, particularly concerned, so long as that dwelling is secured to the agricultural workers of this country, under the conditions of the Bill, at the normal agricultural rent, whether, in fact, a landlord or owner of the property makes a little more than an additional 7d. a week or not.
The great factor that we have to keep before us in connection with this Bill is, are we making available for the agricultural worker further housing accommodation at a rent that he can properly and conveniently pay, and it is nothing to me that in fact the owners may be making a little more than 3 per Cent. in those few isolated cases which may arise under the Bill provided we are giving further housing accommodation to the agricultural worker at a rent he can properly afford to pay, and that undoubtedly has been the great defect of all the efforts that have been made. It is quite a mistake to say that under the Housing Act, 1923, local authorities have not built houses to let, because a considerable number have been let; but apart from that, it is nothing to me as long as under this Measure I am making available to the agricultural workers further housing accommodation at a rent that they can properly afford to pay.
The hon. Gentleman who moved the rejection of the Bill said his great objection to the scheme was that there was no definite public control and that the operation of the scheme left the work still to be conducted under private enterprise. I quite admit the truth of the
latter part of his observation. It is certainly part of the policy of the Government to continue to operate the Bill, so far as it convenientiy and properly can be, under private enterprise, but he certainly made a considerable mistake when he said there was no definite control over the operation of the Bill, because few Bills have been brought in with more stringent conditions as to the user of the dwelling for the agricultural worker. Under the right hon. Gentleman's scheme of 1924, there were no conditions whatever as to the user of the property. All sorts of people are living in houses for which a tremendous subsidy is being paid under the right hon. Gentleman's Bill. Tinder this Bill very stringent conditions are laid down, and what is more, under the Amendment we have made to-day we have given, a most easy remedy to local authorities whereby if a single condition under the Bill is infringed they can within a week apply to a local county court, get an injunction and insist, within a month at the latest, that every one of the conditions under the Bill is observed, I known of no Bill which imposes such stringent conditions both as to the user and as to the rent that has to be paid, and I know of no Measure which gives such an easy and quick remedy by which those conditions can be fully enforced. Therefore to suggest that this Bill is a Bill for the benefit of owners and a Bill under which there is no adequate control, is a complete misconception of the position. This Bill, like other Bills, will depend upon its results, and we shall see which of the two views which have been put forward so strongly in the Debate are correct. Whichever may be right, and I hold very firm convictions on that matter, I say that this is a right and proper attempt for something to be done.
If this is not to be done, what is to be the position of the agricultural worker in this country? Hon. Members opposite, as far as their plans are concerned, have abandoned him. They would condemn him to houses under the Housing Act of 1924 at rents which, in the great majority of cases, he is unable to pay. [HON. MEMBERS: "Give him better wages."] So far as this Bill is concerned, they will agree with me that in every possible way and on every possible occasion they have endeavoured to defeat its proposals. When this Bill goes to the Statute Book
and, as I believe will be the case, very considerable additional housing accommodation at reasonable rents, for the agricultural labourers of this country is provided, houses for people who need them very much, hon. Members opposite must not complain if we do not refrain

from pointing our the conduct of the Labour party in connection with the Bill.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

The House divided: Ayes, 225; Noes, 84.

Division No. 540.]
AYES.
[10.48 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fraser, Captain Ian
Malone, Major P. B.


Albery, Irving James
Frece, Sir Walter de
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Apsley, Lord
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Atholl, Duchess of
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Gates, Percy
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Goff, Sir Park
Neville, H. J.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Nuttall, Ellis


Berry, Sir George
Grotrian, H. Brent
Oakley, T.


Bethel, A.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Betterton, Henry B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Owen, Major G.


Blundell, F. N.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pennefather, Sir John


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Penny, Frederick George


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Brass, Captain W.
Hamilton. Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Briggs, J. Harold
Hammersley, S. S.
Perring, Sir William George


Briscoe, Richard George
Hanbury, C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Broeklebank, C. E. R.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Raine, W.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Haslam, Henry C.
Ramsden, E.


Bullock, Captain M.
Hawke, John Anthony
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Burman, J. 8
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Remer, J. R.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Henderson, Capt R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Carver, W. H.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hohler, Sir Gerard Fitzroy
Ropner, Major L.


Christie, J. A.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities}
Rye, F. G.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cope, Major William
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Craig, Ernest {Chester, Crewe)
Huntingfield, Lord
Savery, S. S.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hurd, Percy A.
Shaw, R. G (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shepperson, E. W.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Jacob, A. E.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Skelton, A. N.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Dixey, A. C.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Smithers, Waldron


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
King, Captain Henry Doublas
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Drewe, C.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Duckworth, John
Knox, Sir Alfred
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Storry-Deans, R.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Livingstone, A. M.
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Elveden, Viscount
Looker, Herbert William
Templeton, W. P.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Lord, Walter Greaves-
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Tinne, J. A.


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Fenby, T. D.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Fermoy, Lord
McLean, Major A.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Fielden, E. B.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Forrest, W.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Foster, Sir Harry S.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Watson, sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Watts, Dr. T.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)
Woodcock, Colonel K. C.


Wells, S. R.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Wragg, Herbert


Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Wiggins, William Martin
Wise, Sir Fredric



Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)
Womersley, W. J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
Major Hennessy and Captain




Margcsson.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.


Adamson, W. M. (Stall., Cannock)
Greves, T.
Naylor, T. E.


Ammon, Charles George
Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold


Attlee, Clement Richard
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Paling, W.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hardie, George D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Barr, J.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben


Batey, Joseph
Hayes, John Henry
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Bondfield, Margaret
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scurr, John


Bromfield, William
Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James


Bromley, J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen, Campbell


Clowes, S.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Taylor, R. A.


Cluse, W. S.
Kelly, W. T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Townend, A. E.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lawrence, Susan
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lawson, John James
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lee, F.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Duncan, C.
Lindley, F. W.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dunnico, H.
Lowth, T.
Welsh, J. C.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gardner, J. P.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Gosling, Harry
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
March, S.



Greenall, T.
Maxton, James
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Montague, Frederick
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. A.




Barnes.


Question put, and agreed to.

Orders of the Day — PUBLIC HEALTH (SMOKE ABATEMENT) BILL [Lords].

Order read for resuming Adjourned Debate on Amendment [1st December] on Consideration of Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee).

CLAUSE 1.—(Amendment of 38 and 39 Vict. c. 55 and 54 and 55 Vict. c. 76 in respect of smoke nuisances.)

Which Amendment was: In page 2, line 11, to leave out from the word "metals" to the end of line 13.—[Mr. Scurr.]

Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

Rear-Admiral BEAMISH: I beg to move, in page 2, line 31, to leave out the words "(not being the chimney of a private dwelling-house)."
The words in this Clause are
For the purposes of Section Ninety-one of the Act a chimney (not being the
chimney of a private dwelling-house) sending forth smoke in such quantity as to he a nuisance.
I think that smoke from any and every domestic chimney is in the nature of a nuisance. Fifty per cent. of the smoke over London comes from domestic chimneys. Since the rear 1'375 we have had no legislation concerning domestic coal smoke, or any other coal smoke, and one has only to go to the top of any high building in the city to realise the immense amount of smoke that comes from our domestic chimneys. As a minor poet has said:
Little wisps of coal smoke,
Seen on every hand;
Make the mighty smoke pall
A scandal in the land.
11.0 p.m.
The question of domestic coal smoke is allied to the question of sewers. Within our lifetime an immense number of smaller private houses, and big ones, too, had no drains whatever, and it is high time we commenced to make the same sort of efforts as regards domestic coal smoke as we have in the matter of drains. There is a considerable and quite understandable opposition to the precautions connected with this domestic smoke, but,
at the same time I consider that we have no more right to pollute the atmosphere of this or any other city than we have to pollute the ground. Good drainage and a clean atmosphere are equally necessary for public health. At the present time there is an enormous wasteage, not only in health, but in many other things. Our washing bills alone might be enormously reduced if we could reduce the domestic coal smoke of the country. These very Houses of Parliament are slowly tumbling about our ears, solely in consequence of the coal smoke in the atmosphere, or the effects of partial combustion of coal. This particular paragraph of the Clause refers to London, a city that unquestionably has the finest drainage in the world and the foulest atmosphere. No doubt I shall be told, and up to a certain point it will be correct, that there is a great deal of sentiment to be considered. At the same time I feel that something in the nature of the Amendment would give a tremendous spur to inventors and other people to bend their energies to the reduction of what is neither more nor less than a scandal.

Colonel Sir ARTHUR HOLBROOK: I beg to second the Amendment.
I do so on the ground that we must make a start with domestic premises in this country. It is very unfair that private builders should be allowed to put up houses which emit smoke so as to damage the premises of the municipalities. I know that the Minister will tell us that there are in this country 8,000,000 houses which are already acting in an objectionable manner by emitting smoke. But we must make a start somewhere. There can be no harm whatever in asking builders who erect houses to take some precaution to check the exit of the smoke which is doing damage to property and vegetation and human life. There is an idea that all the smoke nuisance is caused by factories. That is not so. I have been in Manchester on a Sunday morning when domestic fires only were alight. The damage created by such an enormous Volume of smoke as was then to be seen is almost incalculable.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The minor poet to whom my hon. and gallant Friend referred, spoke of domestic smoke as a
scandal wherever it was found in the land, but my hon. and gallant Friend apparently proposes to confine his operations to London. I observe that he has allowed to pass Clause 1, Sub-section (1), paragraph (a), which deals with the whole of the rest of the country, and that his Amendment would apply only to London. The hon. and gallant Member who seconded the Amendment has delivered a speech which he had prepared for another Amendment, to Clause 5. He was evidently under the impression that he was seconding an Amendment which referred only to new houses. That is not so at all. The Amendment refers to all houses, and it is, therefore, quite impracticable. It is quite impossible, on account of the cost, to demand that everybody should take out existing heating arrangements and substitute gas and electricity; but there is the further difficulty that there would not be enough gas and electricity to go round.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 2.—(By-laws as to noxious smoke.)

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 3, line 35, to leave out the words
noxious smoke and where such by-laws are in force the emission of noxious smoke
and to insert instead thereof the words
smoke of such colour, density, or content as may be prescribed by the by-laws, and where such by-laws are in force the emission of smoke of the character so prescribed.
This Amendment is intended to meet a point made in Committee against the use of the word "noxious" in this connection. The form which is now proposed avoids the use of the word and I hope will be satisfactory.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: I desire to thank the Minister for moving this Amendment. The word "noxious" appeared elsewhere in the Bill with a meaning entirely different from that which it would bear in this Clause, and many of us felt that it would be better if the word were omitted from this Clause.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 4, Line 1, leave out Sub-section (2).— [Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 3.—(Meaning of "chimney.")

Mr. HARDIE: I beg to move, in page 4, line 20, at the end, to insert the words,
whether part of the building or unconnected with any building.
This Clause, in defining the word "chimney," says:
The expression 'chimney' shall include structures and openings of any kind whatsoever capable of emitting smoke.
In towns where there are gardens attached to houses, there is a practice of burning garden refuse in incinerators, and more noxious fumes arise from this than from a chimney where clean coal is being burned. I desire to add these words in order to make sure that we shall include within the scope of the Bill all such forms of the generation of smoke.

Mr. MARCH: I beg to second the Amendment,.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think we have stretched the meaning of the word "chimney" rather far in the Bill already—" structures or openings of any kind "—and to stretch if further would be going beyond what is suitable. If the hon. Member had thought of this Amendment earlier, and put it down on the Order Paper, and had given me some little chance of considering the matter, I might have been able to meet him, but I cannot accept the Amendment at this stage.

Mr. HARDIE: I would only point out that it is possible to have smoke without any opening from the building. There is such a thing as an underground chimney. There is one downstairs, and from it you could make an opening into the park at the end of the House of Lords. I wish to check evasions of that kind.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 5.—(Power to make by-laws respecting new buildings, 57 & 58 Vict. c. cexiii.)

Mr. SPEAKER: I understand that the hon. and gallant Member for Basingstoke (Sir A. Holbrook) has already made his speech on Clause 5. Does he wish to move his Amendment?

Sir A. HOLBROOK: I beg to move, in page 5, line 16, to leave out the words "other than private dwelling-houses."

Mr. SCURR: I beg to second the Amendment.
I do so because I think it is of very great importance. While this question was being discussed in Committee upstairs the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health used the rather singular argument that, owing to the fact that there were large numbers—I think he said 8,000,000—of houses existing at present, and that all these were emitting smoke, it was obviously unfair to apply it to new houses as it would be applied under the terms of this Amendment. Generally, the right hon. Gentleman advances arguments, whether you agree with him or not, which have to be considered, but I really consider that this argument is absolutely absurd. It is really the first time that I thought the right hon. Gentleman belonged to that family which is always saying that "as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end." If we are going to start on this business we should start on the houses that are being built now, more especially when we remember that the various municipal authorities which are building houses under the various schemes are already, before this Bill comes into operation, taking steps in order to deal with the smoke nuisance in the houses that they are building. The only effect of the non-acceptance of this Amendment will be that a large number of private builders will be able to put up new houses without putting into force the things which the municipalities are already doing. That is an obvious injustice, and what has been done already by the local authorities should be followed by other people.

Mr. HARDIE: In relation to this question of the domestic chimney, we all know that the domestic chimney is the greatest sinner so far as the introduction of smoke is concerned, and the figures are contained in a book in this House showing that in the London area there are 283 tons of grit and soot deposited per square mile in the year in the city of London. That in itself ought to draw attention to what ought to be done with the domestic chimney. If you take the average fire in a house in London or any other city you will that when a ton of coal is consumed in an ordinary fire 75 per cent. of what the coal con-
tains during combustion goes up the chimney. There is only a quarter left so far as heat is concerned and three-quarters goes right up the chimney and becomes part of what we call our city atmosphere. If this Bill had been what we were looking forward to and had really made some improvement—I only look upon this Bill as a pretence—we should have dealt with the domestic fire and with private buildings. Then we should have provided for a class of fuel which would still be capable of being consumed in the ordinary fire and would not have created smoke, and yet this Bill seems to try to help the creation of smoke. You cannot cure the smoke nuisance by retaining the present fire and burning ordinary raw coal. There might have been some reason for not accepting this Amendment had we been ignorant of how to manufacture a fuel with a heat value equal to that of coal, without causing any smoke.
But it seems a silly thing to bring in a Bill pretending to deal with smoke when you leave out the major producer of smoke, known as the domestic fire. If the Government had been serious about this, they would have said: "In bringing in this Bill, we have first to give that which will make it easy for the people to deal with the problem. If we say we are going to fine people for letting smoke out of chimneys, we have to see that they get a fuel that does not create smoke." This Bill does nothing of the kind, and to leave out the greatest factor in smoke production seems to be playing at legislation for smoke abatement. If the Minister of Health had taken evidence from the London chimney sweeps, he could have obtained far more evidence of what leaves the chimney than from anyone else, because they are dealing with the ordinary household chimney every day of their lives, and if we had that information I am certain that this Bill would not have been drafted as it now stands.

Mr. HADEN GUEST: I want to draw attention to the fact that the effect of the exclusion of houses is going to be that the smoke trouble is not going to be abated for a very long time to come, and I believe that by taking action such as is suggested in the Amendment, we might take a very long step forward which, in a very short time, might pay for itself. The direct effect of smoke on the health of a large number of people is
such as to cause a very large increase in certain respiratory and other diseases, and the indirect effect of smoke, especially in London and the greater towns, by cutting off the rays of the sun, is to produce a very large amount of disease of a rather different character, not directly respiratory. Those two factors alone, if it were possible to abolish smoke at an early date, would increase the health and efficiency of the country to such an extent as, I am convinced, to make a substantial reduction in the amount of money actually paid in sickness insurance and for hospitals and in other ways on sick people. I suggest that by making the provision proposed in this Amendment, you are not doing anything winch is unreasonable, but you are starting a movement in the direction of the building of scientific fireplaces and appliances for the consumption of smoke which will, when they are adopted, prove to be so useful and economical that they will inevitably extend to other buildings which are already fixed up in the ordinary way. By starting that movement, we shall gradually get a very considerable reduction in the amount of domestic smoke emitted.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member for Mile End (Mr. Scurr) was good enough to say that it was my custom to use arguments which, at any rate, were sufficiently substantial to require an answer, but I am afraid he only made that observation in order to add to it on this occasion that I had brought forward an argument which he described as absolutely absurd. I hope he will forgive me if I point out that the argument I used in Committee has since then passed through his mind and been reproduced in this House with considerable deterioration as a result, and possibly in that fact is to be found the explanation of the laches of which he complained on this occasion. What was the argument in Committee? It was not at all that it was unfair to impose restrictions upon new houses which were not imposed upon old ones.
My argument was directed to pointing out that the Amendment, if carried, could have but a trifling effect in the reduction of the smoke emitted by domestic chimneys to-day, and I pointed out that while it was perfectly true that the domestic smoke is responsible for much
more of the smoke nuisance than the industrial smoke, yet that smoke is produced by the chimneys of the existing 8,500,000 houses in the country. This Amendment only applies to new houses, which are now being erected at the rate of about 200,000 a year, but of that 200,000 one-third at least are being provided by local authorities, and it may be assumed, I think, that the same local authorities who would be disposed to make by-laws under this Amendment do, in fact, provide for the methods which they desire to be employed in the houses they erect. We are therefore reduced to the remaining number of new houses provided by private enterprise, namely, about 132,000 a year; but, again, of these quite a large number are fitted with exactly the same appliances as are the houses provided by the municipalities. And so you come down to a trifling number of houses per annum that could possibly be affected by this Amendment.
The hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) complains that this Bill does not provide for smokeless fuel. That is not the function of the Bill, but if the hon. Member is not aware of it, I may tell him that the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research is devoting its attention, and is spending a substantial sum of money in investigating the subject of smokeless fuel. If it be found to be a commercial proposition—that is, it is reasonably cheap and in a convenient form and available for the householder, the householder will put it in himself. In the meantime, it seems to me quite absurd that for such a very small proportion of the actual chimneys, you should impose upon the particular inhabitants of these houses the necessity for putting in an arrangement which, probably, would be very costly; and, if a certain proportion of houses now built by private enterprise have the open fire instead of the gas fire, it is because of the people who want to inhabit them desire it, and, for my part, I am not prepared to deny it to them until there is a reasonably cheap, economic, and satisfactory alternative.

Mr. GREENWOOD: With my usual optimism, I did think the Government might meet us between the Committee and Report stages, but my optimism
dwindles day by day in view of the experience we have had. The right hon. Gentleman's argument is an extraordinary argument. It is that there are now over 8,000,000 houses, which houses, presumably, he assumes to be eternal, and that there is no need to do anything, because we are only building 200,000 houses per year. He estimates that because one-third of these houses are being built 'by local authorities, they are taking all possible steps, and that a large number of those houses are being provided with appliances which will minimise the smoke nuisance. I am not prepared to accept, the view that the local authorities are doing that, but if there were on the Statute Book an Act which gave them a lead, a very large number would be prepared to do something serious to ensure that everything practicable was done in the circumstances to reduce the smoke evil. It may be true that we cannot at this moment deal with 8,000,000 houses, but that is no reason why we should do nothing at all with the new houses. The right hon. gentleman's argument is: We have 8,000,000 houses, the new houses built every year are a relatively small number, therefore we will do nothing at all. His right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has introduced a Factories Bill which does not at all differentiate between old factories and factories yet to be built, and if this thing had ever been seriously discussed between the Minister of Health and the Borne Secretary I can imagine the Minister of Health saying, "What a silly idea! There are far more old factories, and because it will not improve the old factories, therefore we ought not to introduce a higher standard in the new factories." That is an absurd argument.
If this evil is a serious one, and it is admittedly serious, it is high time we tried to deal with it. I agree that it would impose a very serious burden on the householders in the 8,000.000 houses if we were to attempt to make it compulsory on them to emit no smoke from their chimneys: but at any rate we could ensure that new houses should he built without adding to the Volume of smoke. The Act passed two years ago envisaged the building of 2,500,000 houses over a term of years. That will mean increasing the existing number of houses, or displacing some-
thing more than 25 per cent. of the existing houses. If all those new houses were to be smokeless, we should, at the end of that term of years, have reduced the smoke nuisance, so far as domestic smoke is concerned, by a quarter. We submit that is worth doing. Therefore, it is reasonable and just, in the case of the new houses, to suggest that a strong lead should be given to the local authorities to encourage them to instal proper appliances, which in its turn would encourage manufacturers of those appliances to develop their business, and by force of example would lead to the introduction of the appliances in the older houses. I think, therefore, the Government are really destroying the value of the Bill by limiting its operations to industrial buildings.

Mr. STORRY DEANS: I heard with alarm a Minister with the title of Minister of Health talking seriously of the prospect of gas fires in houses. I do not know the peculiar constitution of the right hon. Gentleman or of those who talk so lightly of making it compulsory to have gas fires in houses to the exclusion of the decent, homely, honest, domestic coal fire. I am a North countryman. Gas fires may be all very well for the anaemic South, but we men of the North want a Coal fire such as our fathers had before us. For my own part I find there is no cheer in a gas fire, and although I may be told that the smoke from my coal fire assists in poisoning the people outside, I prefer that very much to being poisoned myself by a gas fire within my own house. I like to think that some day there will be discovered a smokeless fuel. When that day comes this will be a talkless House and we shall have approached some distance towards the millennium. That time is not yet, but when I try to think of the decent English folk and the decent Yorkshire folk trying to look cheerful sitting round a gas fire I am filled with dismay. I therefore hope that no Tory Minister of Health, at any rate, whatever may happen to hon. Gentlemen opposite, will ever countenance. such a monstrous proposal.

Mr. MARDY JONES: I gather from the Minister of Health that his chief objection to this proposal is because by adopting this suggestion you would not be able to get in centres like London sufficient gas and electricity—

Mr. SPEAKER: That argument was used on an Amendment to Clause 1, and I would remind the hon. Member that Clause 5 applies only to new houses.

Mr. JONES: The argument was that there was not a sufficient supply of gas and electricity to meet the needs of this Amendment. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I wish to draw attention to the fact that there is an alternative which in fact is better than either gas or electricity, and that is not Yorkshire or Derbyshire coal, but the best coal the world has ever produced, and that is Welsh coal. Wales admittedly produces the finest anthracite in the world, and it contains 95 per cent. of pure carbon. In all the large cities on the Continent of Europe they have solved the smoke nuisance with regard to domestic fires because they make anthracite burning compulsory.
In New York, with a population of 3,000,000 people, they have no smoke nuisance, because the burning of anthracite has been made compulsory, and the same applies to most of the big cities on the Continent of Europe, where, if they had continued to burn ordinary coal, they would have had the same smoke nuisance as we have now. This nuisance has practically been abolished in America and on the Continent, and if we can send anthracite to foreign countries surely we could supply it to our own people, and then we should be able to retain the cheerfulness of our own fireside without gas or electricity coming into it. Then we should be able to stare in the coal fires and imagine the fairies with us, and there would be no need either for electricity or gas for this purpose, because we have within our own country the finest fuel in the world in Welsh anthracite.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 192: Noes, 54.

Division No. 541.]
AYES.
[11.36 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Balfour, George (Hampstead)


Albery, Irving James
Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.


Alexander, E. E. (Leytor.)
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Barnett, Major Sir Richard


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Raine, W.


Bethel, A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Ramsden, E.


Blundell, F. N.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F, (Dulwich)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Remer, J. R.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Brass, Captain W.
Hammersley, S. S.
Rice, Sir Frederic*


Briggs, J. Harold
Hanbury, C.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Briscoe, Richard George
Harrison, G. J. C.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hastam, Henry C.
Ropner, Major L.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hawke, John Anthony
Ruggles-Brist, Major E. A.


Bullock, Captain M.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M,
Rye, F. G.


Burman, J. B.
Henderson, Capt, R.R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Carver, W. H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hennessy, Major J. R. G,
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Ladywood)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Charleris, Brigadier-General J.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Christie, J. A.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylabone)
Savery, S. S.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks. W.R., Sowerby)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Cope, Major William
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Huntingfield, Lord
Skelton, A. N.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish universities)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jacob, A. E.
Smithers, Waldron


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Storry-Deans, R.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Lee, F.
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lindley, F. W.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Templeton, W. P.


Dixey, A. C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Looker, Herbert William
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Duckworth, John
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Edmondson, Major A. J
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Elliot, Major Walter E.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Everard, W. Lindsay
McLean, Major A.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Fenby, T. D.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Watson Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Fermoy, Lord
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Watts, Dr. T.


Fielden, E. B.
Mitchell. S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wells, S. R.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Forrest, W.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wiggins, William Martin


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Frece, Sir Walter de
Nuttall, Ellis
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E
Oakley, T.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Galbraith, S. F. W.
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Ganzoni, Sir John
Owen. Major G.
Womersley, W. J,


Gates, Perry
Pennefather, Sir John
Wood, E. (Chest'r, stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Penny, Frederick George
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Goff, Sir Park
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wragg, Herbert


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Grant, Sir J. A.
Perring, Sir William George



Greene, W. P. Crawford
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Grotrian, H. Brent
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton
Captain lord Stanley and Captain Margesson.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Price, Major C. W. M.



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Ammon, Charles George
Guest, Haden (Southwark, N.)
Riley, Ben


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Robinson, W. c. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Barnes, A.
Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John


Barr, J.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Bondfield, Margaret
Hirst, G. H.
Stephen, Campbell


Bromley, J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Townend, A. E.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Bhondda, West)
Watson, W, M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kelly, W. T.
Welsh, J. C


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Duncan, C.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
March, S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Maxton, James



Gardner, J. P.
Murnin, H.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Oliver, George Harold
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.



Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.

The following Amendment stood on the Order Paper in, the name of Captain WATERHOUSE:

In page 5, line 19, at the end, to insert the words
And in private dwelling places any such grates or fire places calculated to reduce as far as practicable the emission of smoke as may from time to time be approved by the Minister.

Mr. SPEAKER: The decision of the House just now covers this Amendment.

Captain WATERHOUSE: I submit that my Amendment raises a different point from the last Amendment. That was doing away with coal fires in grates altogether. If the last Amendment had been carried it would enable local authorities to abolish fire places and instal electric heaters and gas cookers if they so desire. My Amendment is quite different. It is merely to get the Minister to put in provisions which will enable him to see that efficient and economic fire places are used.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member proposes, in the same words to all intents and purposes, such arrangements as are calculated to prevent or reduce the emission of smoke. By-laws have to be approved in any case by the Minister. It is the same thing another way round.

Captain WATERHOUSE: With respect I submit that my Amendment—

Mr. SPEAKER: In any case, I do not Select the Amendment.

CLAUSE 9.—(Saving as to steam vessels.)

Mr. WOMERSLEY: I beg to move, in page 6, line 16, to leave out the words, "habitually used as a seagoing ship."
The object of the Amendment is practically to bring the Clause back into the form it occupied when it left this House on Second Reading and went to Committee. To the shipping industry the Clause, as it then stood, was perfectly satisfactory and they did not put forward any opposition to the Bill. In Committee an hon. Member moved an Amendment that only ocean-going vessels should be excluded from the Act. The Parliamentary Secretary did not accept that Amendment because the hon. Member's definition of an ocean-going vessel was rather vague. He said that it was a
vessel that crossed the ocean. The Parliamentary Secretary introduced a further Amendment, which is now included in the Bill. According to a judgment read by the Parliamentary Secretary as the definition of a sea-going vessel, "a sea-going vessel does not mean a ship which might go to sea or is capable of going to sea, but a ship that does go to sea." An Amendment inserted in a Bill based upon a definition of that character is not by any means satisfactory to shipping interests. As far as I can gather from that definition, we shall be in this position, if this Bill becomes law in its present form, that vessels which go to sea or are preparing to go to sea will be exempt from the Act, but vessels such as steam lighters, tugs, ferry boats and other harbour, dock and river craft, win have to come under the regulations enacted by this Biil. It is not fair to place that hardship upon this type of vessel, many of them owned by small owners. There is no effective appliance that has been invented, so far as I know, that will deal with the small class of boiler in these vessels. The argument used by the Minister of Health with regard to existing houses which emit smoke, that it would be difficult to ask people to alter their fireplaces in favour of other appliances, applies equally to tugs, lighters and other harbour, dock and river craft. An argument, which has been effective, has been advanced to the effect that from the terrace of this House certain craft can be seen emitting great Volumes of smoke. The explanation is simple. They have to lower their funnel to go under Westminster Bridge, and they have to do that when they are approaching the bridge. I defy anyone to bring forth an appliance that will obviate the emission of smoke in these circumstances. Whatever you may do in the way of fining, you will never be able to remedy that evil. But I submit that this Clause will create a great hardship amongst the smaller owners of these particular craft. The difficulty is very great indeed, for the man who is firing the boiler has often many other duties to perform. He will have to be specially trained to deal with this matter; it is a question whether it can he done, and heavy expense will have to be incurred by owners of these small craft, which will make it really a hardship. I appeal to the House to accept this Amendment.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: I beg to second the Amendment.
In doing so I would like to call attention to the position of lighters and tugs. These lighters and tugs are probably plying in part in salt water and yet, according to the definition, do they "go to sea"? There will be a great deal of confusion. What small craft can be called "sea-going craft"? Before he finally passes this Clause the right hon. Gentleman should take a look round the docks and see what small craft are to be affected. If he does so, he will see many small interests affected and, I think, he will then do his best to exempt a great many of these small tugs and lighters, and possibly barges, which go perhaps, beyond a river. I hope he will see his way to meet us in this matter.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think my hon. Friend need be under any apprehension as to the difficulty of interpreting the term "sea-going vessel." That was defined so long ago as the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and I do not know that any practical difficulty has arisen. What the Clause does now, as amended in Committee, is to bring under the operation of the Bill craft which ply in harbours, rivers and other inland waters. I think that it is very reasonable that it should. A great deal of nuisance is created by smoke unnecessarily emitted from these craft on inland waters. I think the hon. Member who moved the Amendment hardly realised how small is the change the Bill makes in the present situation. These craft are already subject to the law if they emit "black" smoke; they are not subject if they emit smoke which is not "black." The hon. Member says no effective means have been found, but under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 they can plead that they have used the best practicable means to prevent smoke, and that is provided to be a good defence. I think there is really very little change made by the Bill. It does give some additional powers; it does give power to inflict heavier fines where offences are committed. I do not think it is necessary for my hon. Friend to press his Amendment.

Mr. GROTRIAN: I hope my hon. Friend will press his Amendment, be-
cause this seriously concerns the port of Hull. Owners of tugs, ferry boats and craft on an estuary three or four miles wide may be liable to be fined for emitting a certain amount of smoke. It may be said that there has been no certain protest on the part of shipowners against this Clause, but then, of course, shipowners, generally speaking, own oceangoing vessels, and people owning this smaller sort of craft are not so well organised or so wealthy as to be able to make effective protests. Shipowners generally may have no objection to this Clause, but the smaller people would make it known that they have if they could make themselves heard.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 12.—(Short title, extent and commencement.)

Lieut.-Commander ASTOURY: I beg to move, in page 7, line 21, to leave out the word "January," and to insert instead thereof the word "July."
There is no doubt that this Bill will cause a great deal of inconvenience to many manufacturers in the country, and especially to small manufacturers who have not the capital to put their works into an efficient state to meet the requirements of the Measure at such short notice. I hope, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman will allow six months before bringing the Bill into operation so as to give them ample time to adjust their works to the altered conditions.

Mr. WILLIAMS: I beg to second the Amendment.
While the Bill is much better then when it passed Second Reading it will involve manufacturers in certain difficulties, and I think they should have at least six months to prepare themselves for the new conditions which are to come into operation.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I had hoped, origiNally, that the Bill would become law before the House rose, for the Summer Recess, but as it has been delayed until a short time before it was origiNally intended to come into operation, and in view of the events of the past six months, I think it is not unreasonable to postpone its operation for six months.

Mr. GREENWOOD: Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman is going to support 1928 as against 1927, which is proposed in the next Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Oh no.

Mr. GREENWOOD: That is in the minds of the movers of this Amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS: No.

Mr. SPEAKER: The first Amendment is an alternative to the second. It is not an additional one. I do not propose to call the second Amendment.

Question put: "That the word 'January' stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 44; Noes, 170.

Division No. 542].
AYES.
[12.0 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Potts, John S.


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Riley, Ben


Barr, J.
Hardie, George D.
Scurr, John


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hayes, John Henry
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Bondfield, Margaret
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Taylor, R. A.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Townend, A. E.


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lindley, F. W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lunn, William
Welsh, J. C.


Duncan, C.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Gardner, J. P.
March, S.



Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maxton, James
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Oliver, George Harold
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Paling, W.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Forrest, W.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Albery, Irving James
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Manningham-Buller, Sir, Mervyn


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Nuttall, Ellis


Bethel, A.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Oakley, T.


Blundell, F. N.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Brass, Captain W.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Owen, Major G.


Briggs, J. Harold
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Pennefather, Sir John


Briscoe, Richard George
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Penny, Frederick George


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hammersley, S. S.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Bullock, Captain M.
Hanbury, C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Burman, J. B.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Assheton


Carver, W. H.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hawke, John Anthony
Rainn, W.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Ramsden, E.


Christie, J. A.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Remer, J. R.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cope, Major William
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Richardson. Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & wh'by)
Roberts. E. H. G. (Flint)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ropner, Major L.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey. Farnham)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Huntingfield, Lord
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Curzorn, Captain Viscount
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hernel Hempst'd)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Jacob, A. E.
Savery, S. S.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Dixey, A. C.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)


Duckworth, John
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Shepperson, E. W.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Skelton, A. N.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Looker, Herbert William
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Smithers, Waldron


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Stanley, Col. Hon G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Fenby, T. D.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Fermoy, Lord
McLean, Major A.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Fielden, E. B.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Story-Deans, R.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Streatfield, Captain S. R.


Stuart. Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Wise, Sir Fredric


Templeton, W. P.
Watson, sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Womersley, W. J.


Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Watts, Dr. T.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)
Wells, S. R.
Wood, Sir H. K. (Woolwich, West)


Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen. S.)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Wiggins, William Martin
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Williams, Com. C- (Devon, Torquay)



Wallace, Captain D. E.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Captain Margesson and Captain Bowyer.


Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl



Bill read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Word "July" there inserted in the Bill.

Orders of the Day — PRISONS (SCOTLAND) BILL.

As amended (in the Standing Committee) considered.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Mr. STEPHEN: I wish to raise a point with regard to this Bill. The Bill was in Committee on Thursday last. When we went to the Vote Office to get copies of the proceedings in Committee we found that the proceedings had not been printed. We wanted to put down some Amendments to this Bill but, contrary to the practice that has always been observed in connection with our Scottish business, no report was available. I wish to point out that in the Committee we occupied two hours in the discussion of certain very important questions in connection with the subject matter of this Bill. We made further inquiries as to why the proceedings had not been published, and we were informed that it. was because the Scottish Office had intimated that they did not want publication. I wish to submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that it is very important that there should be a record of this kind and, had such a record been available, possibly we would have been willing to allow this Bill to go through without any further ado. There is no record now of the position which we took up in Committee, and I wish to know if I would be in order in asking that the further stages of the Bill be postponed until the Scottish Office arrange for the publication of the report of the proceedings in Standing Committee?

Mr. SPEAKER: I have just sent for the Bill, and I find the only alterations made in it were drafting Amendments changing the title "Secretary for Scotland" to "Secretary of State for Scotland." I do not think so small an alteration justifies the printing of the proceedings and all the

cost involved. In regard to the other matter, the question of the printing of the proceedings in Standing Committee, I think the position is that we really had not the staff to take the report.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Scotland is to be set aside.

Mr. STEPHEN: I would like to point out that the Scottish Grand Committee is the one Committee where Scottish Members have an opportunity of dealing with Scottish matters. It is of the utmost importance to Scottish Members that there should be a report of what took place. There were two hours of very important discussion. It is true that only one Amendment was accepted by the Committee, but on the second Clause there was a very important discussion, and there is no record of it. I would also submit that if there were so many Committees, and if the pressure of work on the printers was so great, this Committee which considers Scottish affairs has not, I think, unduly burdened the printers this year. I think the Secretary of State for Scotland will agree that when the Rating Bill was before us, we showed great moderation and tried to be helpful. I think that. if the Government agreed to adjourn this Bill to-night, and from the notes have a report of the proceedings printed, it would clear a great many difficulties out of the way.

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think I can accept that, and it could not make any difference. But while the hon. Member has been speaking, I have been inquiring into the matter, and I find that a transcript was made, and that it is available in the Library, or it could be made available. But I will take into consideration what the hon. Member has said, and if it be desired by Scottish Members that a print should be made from the transcript, I will see if it is possible to do that.

Mr. STEPHEN: We have not had an opportunity of putting down our Amendments again. We have been waiting for the report in order to put down our Amendments, and we have had no opportunity of doing so. The Report stage has been practically taken away from us because we have not had a publication of the report. While it may be true that a transcript is to be seen in the Library, our constituents are interested in our proceedings, and there is a big agitation in Scotland with reference to the position of Scottish Members here. There is a very powerful Home Rule Association, who are intensely interested in this question in connection with Scottish affairs, and our constituents are not going to have any record in connection with this Bill. We have not had an opportunity of putting down Amendments on the Paper in the light of the discussion. It might be said that we could have put down the Amendments that we put down before in Commitee, but the Amendments would have been altered in view of what the Solicitor-General said, but we have not any record of what he said. It is important for Scotland, if not for England, and it means that the Report stage of a Measure which is of very great importance is being taken from us, because of the mistake that has been made.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: As another Scottish Member present in Committee upstairs, I can say that there was nothing of importance said beyond the situation created by two hon. Members—

Mr. SPEAKER: We must not go into that now.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: With whom does the decision lie as to whether or not the reports of the Standing Committees are to be printed and circulated?

Mr. SPEAKER: I believe that finally it lies with me, and, of course, I take the responsibility for the decision. But hon. Members will understand that I have a duty to perform with regard to economy, and my Estimates are already greatly exceeded for the present year by the great number of Standing Committees and the great number of sittings, particularly of the Standing Committee which considered the Electricity Bill. I must, therefore, ask the House to give some consideration to the question of
economy in this matter, but I will at once look into the question, and see if there is a serious desire that these proceedings should be in print, and, therefore, on record.

Mr. BUCHANAN: May I submit that in considering this matter, Mr. Speaker, you will not forget that this is the first time since I have been a Member, in the. past four years, that there have been any discussions, either in the House or in Committee, on the question of prison reform in Scotland, and that this Bill proposes a very fundamental change in prison administration in Scotland? For that reason, we were very anxious that the proceedings should be reported and printed, because they are the first chronicle of any real discussion of this question. On Second Reading we were going to discuss the question, but the Secretary of State for Scotland appealed to us to let the Second Reading go through, on the ground that there would be full and ample opportunity in Committee for a discussion, and the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton), who was then submitting certain reasons against the Bill, on that plea withdrew his opposition to the Second Reading. We, therefore, saved a certain expense to this House by not forcing a discussion, which we might have done, on Second Reading, and we are repaid for that by having taken from us a printed record of the proceedings in Committee. That is what happens when we treat the Secretary of State for Scotland too well.

Mr. SPEAKER: Certainly this is not the first time that the report of a Standing Committee has not been printed. If it is the first occasion in. reference to the Scottish Standing Committee, it shows how well Scotland has been treated.

Mr. BUCHANAN: It is true that this is the first occasion in reference to Scotland, and I accept, as I must do, what you have said, that it is not the first occasion outside of Scotland. It must be remembered, however, that for the first two years of the four during which I have been a Member there were practically no meetings of the Scottish Standing Committee.

Mr. SPEAKER: I have already tried to do my best to meet hon. Members.

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): As hon. Members for Scotland know, I was not present at the Committee, but I understand from my hon. Friend who was in charge of the Bill in Committee that there was a very full discussion upon the points of the Bill on that occasion. The Committee definitely came to the conclusion that no Amendment need be made to the Bill, with the exception of one purely drafting Amendment, which was accepted. In those circumstances, while I appreciate the anxiety of Scottish Members that they should have a report of the Committee which deals with Scottish affairs, Mr. Speaker has intimated to the House that his attention having been drawn to it, he will see whether that can be met in this particular ease.
I demur from the idea that this Bill is really dealing with what an hon. Member has been pleased to describe as prison reform. It is nothing of the kind. It is a perfectly simple Measure, in the first instance, for the transfer of disused prisons, and, in particular, with regard to the Calton prison in Edinburgh, and the second part of the Bill is not to start any new custom or practice. There are in Scotland a certain number of legalised cells. I do not propose—I will be frank with the House—to legalise a large number of new cells, but quite the contrary. In fact, I look forward rather to reducing even the number of these cells which are legalised, but what I do ask is that in certain districts, particularly in the more outlying districts, the period of detention in such cells may be extended, and that is done in the main in the interests of the prisoners concerned. It is also done for the purpose, in some measure, of economy, but that is a secondary consideration. In the main it is in the interests of the prisoners concerned. It is not introducing any new principle whatever, and T will undertake to say that, in view of what has passed, I hope to revise the number of cells that are at present legalised.

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: On a point of Order. The right hon. Gentleman gave us a speech on the merits of the Bill, but I understood that the question raised was as to whether the Bill was to be considered at all. I understand that we take exception to any further consideration of this Bill until the pro-
ceedings of the Standing Committee are submitted to the Scottish Members. it seems to me that we are being jumped into the acceptance of the Third Reading. I submit that the question should be first considered whether there is to be further discussion on this matter, and whether we are to get a copy of the proceedings in Committee.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain FitzRoy): The Question is, "That the Bill be now read the Third time." [HON. MEMBERS "No"]. That is the only Question before the House. The hon. Member for the Camlachie Division of Glasgow (Mr. Stephen) it is true, raised a point of Order, but the actual Question before the House is, "That the Bill he now read the Third time."

Mr. MAXTON: I must protest on the point of Order. There are three points at issue before we reach the Third Reading. My hon. Friend the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) certainly rose before you put the Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time," and we did discuss the question whether the Debate was to proceed without the proceedings of the Committee being published. We have also to consider the Report stage of the Bill, which was amended in Committee. That Amendment has to be reported to this House, and may be the subject of debate, and only after those matters are disposed of do we come to the question of the Third Reading.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker put from the Chair the Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time." It was after that that the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) rose to a point of Order.

Mr. STEPHEN: I rose when the Bill was, called by the. Clerk at the Table, and I put a point of Order to Mr. Speaker with regard to the Report stage. I put a two-fold point of Order. I put a point of Order with regard to publication and I asked him to accept a Motion for the Adjournment of the Report stage, and I was still expecting a further reply from the Chair to my request for the Adjournment. I certainly got a reply to my point dealing with the publication: Mr. Speaker himself was going to consider the possibility of the proceedings in the Committee being published. But I still
thought I had made out a very sound case for the Adjournment of the proceedings on the Report stage, and I am astounded to learn that the Third Reading is being taken, because we would certainly have desired to ask Mr. Speaker, in view of the circumstances, to allow us to hand in a manuscript Amendment for the, Report stage.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am sure I am in the recollection of the House that Mr. Speaker said he was unable to accept the proposal made by the hon. Member. It is clear that he promised to see if we could have the report of the Committee printed, but undoubtedly he did not accept the point of Order made by the hon. Member and the question now is the Third Reading. I want to say this to my hon. Friends from Scotland, that I see no real and material advantage which they will gain by objecting at this stage to The passing of the Bill. On the contrary, I see very great disadvantages which will accrue to Scotland if the Bill fails to pass; and I would remind hon. Members from Scotland that we have received a very fair share of the time of the House for these matters. This is a Bill, as we have tried to explain to the House, which embodies no new principle.

Mr. D. GRAHAM: May I put to the right hon. Gentleman our point of view on this side, which was raised before Mr. Speaker left the Chair? We asked for a postponement of the consideration of the Bill till we got a report of what happened in the Committee, and, speaking for myself, I understood when the right hon. Gentleman rose that it was to meet that print, and to give us an indication of whether he was willing to adjourn the discussion. I would like a direct answer to that question: Are you willing to adjourn the discussion to-night until we get the report of the Committee proceedings?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir. I think the situation is clear. The Committee have no right to demand the printing of the proceedings of the Committee, and Mr. Speaker has already ruled on that subject.

Mr. MAXTON: I must insist—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] On a point of Order—

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member rise to a point of Order?

Mr. MAXTON: The point of Order I wish to make is this: That, the right hon. Gentleman has no right to usurp your duties, that on the question of Order you, Sir, have the last word and not the Secretary of State for Scotland. I was under the same misapprehension as the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. D. Graham) that when the right hon. Gentleman rose it was to make some concession and not a Third Reading speech against us. We thought it would be something that would enable us to get the Bill recommitted to the Committee or that he was proposing to adjourn the debate. If his tone is to be the tone and spirit of the discussion of the Bill at this stage I rather fancy the House is in our hands rather than in his. I do not want that spirit. The hon. and gallant Member for Ayr Burghs (Lieut.-Col. Moore) suggests there is nothing in the Bill that matters to anybody. That is not, my view. It is a very important matter for Scotland. We have a perfect right at this stage before the right hon. Gentleman moves the Third Reading to move to recommit the Bill to the Committee.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: There seems to be some misunderstanding as to the actual Question before the House. The question was whether this Bill be read the third time. After that was put, there was a point of Order by the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen), and I understand that point of order was settled by Mr. Speaker before he left the Chair. If there be any desire that that particular point of order, or that the consideration of the Bill he deferred, the hon. Member must move to that effect.

Mr. STEPHEN: I beg to move "That this Bill he recommitted to the Scottish Committee." I desire to do so because of what I believe to be a very sound objection to what has taken place.

Mr. DENNIS HERBERT: On a point of Order. Was not the Secretary of State for Scotland in possession of the House?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I understand the hon. Gentleman is now moving to recommit the Bill. That would be an Amendment to the Third Reading.

Mr. D. GRAHAM: Would it be in order to move the adjournment for further consideration of the Bill?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: That is not the point before the House.

Sir J. GILMOUR: Might I appeal to hon. Members? There does not seem to me to be any substance in the objections they have raised. If anything like the recommittal of the Bill were effected, the Bill is lost. That is a serious matter from the point of view of Scotland, and I beg my colleagues not to carry their opposition to that extent. I gave them a definite assurance that there is no new policy in this Bill. I am not asking the House to give its sanction to anything new. Indeed, it is rather a limitation in the system of machinery. If the hon. Gentlemen take the responsibility of losing this Bill against the wishes of the Corporation and City of Edinburgh they know exactly what responsibility they are taking. I must insist upon giving the Bill the Third Reading.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) move that the Debate be adjourned?

Mr. STEPHEN: I beg to move, "That the Debate be now adjourned."
I am sorry if there is a difficulty and this misunderstanding. If I were to move the adjournment of this Debate and that Motion were accepted by the Government and the House, and the Secretary of State for Scotland arranged in the interval for a report of the Committee proceedings to be printed, we might possibly take the Third Reading on Thursday again. As far as we are concerned, I think we may promise there will be no serious objection in the way of the Government with regard to the next stage. It seems to me to be a matter of great importance that the Bill should be in the hands of Members of the Committee before the Bill finally goes from this House. We are prepared to face any responsibility in connection with this Bill with regard to the Corporation of Edinburgh or any other Corporation. But the House must recognise the difficulty of the position in which we are placed. I would like to put this matter to the Secretary of State for Scotland. It was stated that Mr. Speaker is ultimately responsible for the decision with regard to publication of the report of the proceedings for the Committee, but I want to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland
if it is not the case that it was the Scottish Office, his department that was responsible for the proceedings not being published? That at least was conveyed to me. I made inquiries in connection with this matter. I think we have made a very reasonable proposal to the Government. The Solicitor-General for Scotland, who was in charge of the Bill, will bear me out when I say-that at the proceedings in Committee, we did not show any desire to obstruct the Measure, but we put forward matters that we thought were of very great importance. We are anxious to safeguard the interests for the Scottish people, and I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland will reciprocate by accepting the friendly proposal we have made.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I beg to Second the Motion.
I should like to draw attention to the reply made by the Secretary of State for Scotland, who throws the responsibility of the defeat of the Bill on us. If he were more conciliatory to us, there would be no need to interfere with it at all. He says we must take responsibility, and we are prepared to do so. The right hon. Gentleman had some friends on Friday from Scotland. Most of them stayed away because they were frightened to vote. Those who came had not even the courage to force a division.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The Question is, "That the Debate be now adjourned." The hon. Member must confine himself to the Motion before the House.

Mr. BUCHANAN: For the moment I temporarily left that point, but I submit that this point was not raised by me. It was a perfectly legitimate reply to the Secretary of State for Scotland, who stated that we must take the responsibility. He should recollect the spirit shown by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) when the Second Reading of this Bill was before the House. It was taken about midnight. There had been matters of contention in the House. The hon. Member raised what he thought was an important matter. While the hon. and gallant Member for Ayr Burghs (Lieut.-Colonel Moore) may not think so, we have a right to state our opinion here. We could have delayed the Second Reading. We could have made speeches which Mr. Speaker would have accepted. Yet, for the sake of harmony in Scotland,
we agreed, without any further Debate, to allow the whole question of this Bill to go to the Committee for further discussion. It never passed through our minds that no report was to be taken of the Committee's proceedings, or we could have had our thoughts placed on record in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Because we wished the Bill to proceed, we withdrew our opposition and allowed the Secretary of St ate to get this Bill through to Committee at the earliest possible moment. Our guarantee to facilitate business has been met by the Secretary of State for Scotland, and the Scottish Department, by a refusal to print the proceedings, and now he refuses to delay consideration until a later day. Our political opinions may be only worthy of contempt, but the Secretary of State for Scotland should be fair even to his opponents from Scotland. On the Second Reading we could have stated objection after objection. English Members may think we should not ask for the proceedings of the Scottish Committee to be published. There was the Electricity Committee on which the hon. Member for Watford (Mr. D. Herbert) was—

Mr. D. HERBERT: I was not on the Committee.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: This has very little to do with the Adjournment of the Debate.

Mr. BUCHANAN: We are moving the Adjournment because the proceedings were not printed. The hon. Member for the Hulme Division (Sir J. Nail), was on the Electricity Committee. That Committee had long-continued meetings. Their proceedings were printed and brought thoroughly up to date. The Scottish Grand Committee has been a thoroughly business-like assembly. Criticism has never been unduly carried on and there were no attempts to unduly delay the proceedings. We could have had many more meetings. Now we are being rewarded by the Secretary of State carrying this thing to a degree never known on the part of any previous Secretary for Scotland. Members who have been long in the House say they have never known an occasion on which the Scottish Grand Committee was not reported; at no time have they known the proceedings not to be printed. The Secretary for Scotland has recently
been promoted to be Secretary of State, and one of his first actions has been to deprive the Scottish Grand Committee of a legitimate thing.

Mr. MAXTON: I regret that the Secretary of State for Scotland, supported I think by the Prime Minister, has taken the line that this Bill must be passed to-night or no further opportunity will be available this session and that the whole responsibility for the wrecking of this Measure will rest on the shoulders of one or two of us who are asking for what I regard as a very simple thing. I do not think that in the three or four years T have been in the House, I have ever asked for the report of a Committee and not received it. I went on this occasion, because I was very anxious to study closely certain statements of the Solicitor-General. I had had these statements and assurances him and I wanted to see them in cold print at my leisure to see if there was any substance in them. I want to say to English Members that there are principles involved in this Bill, if I understand it properly, which are of very vital importance to the whole of the country. There is, as the Secretary of State has said, power conferred upon him to extend the use of police cells for the detention of prisoners, tried rind untried, from 14 days to 31 days. This is well known by everyone who has taken any interest in the prison question and I have done so for some considerable time. It is time, with regard to the unfortunate section of our community that gets into prison, that this House of Commons should take very seriously anything affecting their condition while there. While there is often great interest in a prisoner's trial, and people are prepared to be interested in him after he comes out, while he is in no one hears very much about him, and this Bill extends the time a man can be kept in the cells from 14 to 31 days. As I was saying, people who are interested in prison questions realise that the big proportion of the prisoners in our ordinary prisons are prisoners who are there for 30 days or less. This proposal which the Secretary of State for Scotland is bringing forward is to detain men under 30 days' arrest in the police cells. That means that our ordinary prisons maintained out of the national cost are
to be half-emptied and the police cells maintained by the local authorities are to be filled to an extent they have never been before. The population of the police cells is going to be doubled and the population of the prisons is going to be halved, and in the doing of that there is going to be transferred a financial responsibility from the Central Authority on to the local authority. And there are a lot of other things involving a prisoner in prison. He is entitled to certain rights.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Captain FitzRoy): I do not think the hon. Member can make a thorough survey of this Measure on the Motion for the Adjournment of the Debate.

Mr. MAXTON: The point I was making was a legitimate one in its beginnings, although perhaps it extended too long. I was merely trying to impress upon the Prime Minister, who seems to be the obstacle in the way of the Adjournment of the Debate and bringing forward the Bill on another occasion—I was trying to convey to the Prime Minister that this is hot a little pettifogging matter. There are principles involved in it that deserve the careful consideration of the Members of this House. Personally, I wanted to see exactly the statement that was made by the Solicitor-General in Committee, to see how much it meant or how little it meant. There ought to he good reasons why we should adjourn the Debate until some night next week. The amount of time Scotland has had out of this Session has not been very great. This is a matter worthy of consideration, and I support the statement of my hon. Friend the Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen). We do not want to be fractious or objectionable about this Bill. I know it is a Scottish characteristic to start getting obstinate on account of the other fellow getting obstinate. I do not want to be like that. If the right hon. Gentleman will meet us in this way, I support the promise absolutely when the Bill is brought forward on another occasion. if the Committee proceedings report. give anything like a decent assurance then there will not be any further difficulty in the further passage of the Bill.

Mr. D. GRAHAM: Like the hon. Gentleman I was not present at the
Committee, but what I have heard since this matter has been raised makes all the more clear to my mind the absolute necessity that we should have a record of what transpired in Committee so that we can be in a position to see whether the Bill is what seems to be present in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman the secretary of State for Scotland. According to the statements submitted there was something like a two hours' discussion in Committee, and a very important statement was made by the Solicitor-General for Scotland. To enable us to deal effectively and satisfactorily with the people of Scotland as a whole and not merely one particular part of it, it is essential that we should know what it is the Solicitor-General has said when dealing with this Bill, and it depends upon what he said whether we would agree that it should get an easy passage through this House. At the same time I put it to my right hon. Friend, quite frankly, that had he been in our place, had he been sitting on this side of the House, and the Labour party had done something like what has happened here—I put it to him quite fairly and to his Friends—that they would take exactly the same objection to the passage or the consideration of the Bill that we are doing now. I do not doubt but that the Bill does contain all the blessings, if there can be any such to any poor fellows who happen to be in prison, as are in the mind of the Secretary of State for Scotland. We do not wish to offer any unreasonable opposition to the passage of the Bill but we do ask that the business that was transacted at the Scottish Committee should be on record and if the Secretary of State for Scotland can give us the assurance that he is going to give us that I do not think there is any likelihood of any difficulty in the passage of the Bill on any night before the adjournment for the Christmas recess. I do not see any reason why if there is any desire for anything like mutual fairness with each other and reciprocity on this question he should not meet this reasonable request. I am sorry it is necessary that we should have had to raise this matter but if it were to become a burning question before the election in Scotland it is one that will stick. I again appeal to my right hon. Friend that he will be well advised to consider the
wisdom of acceding to the reasonable request.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I very much regret if any of my hon. Friends feel any discourtesy on my part. I must say at once that the question as to whether the Committee proceedings are to be printed is not one for my decision. That is for Mr. Speaker. As to the question of adjourning this Debate, I must frankly say that I cannot accept the Motion for Adjournment. It is quite clear that we have had a long discussion both here in this House and in Committee upstairs, and in accordance with the rules of the House everything has been carried out.

Mr. MAXTON: I assent to that.

1.0 A.M.

Sir J. GILMOUR: A very full report of the proceedings in Committee was published in the Scottish Press. Hon. Members talk about the general public being informed on these matters. It is only through the Press that they can be informed, and a very full report was published in the scottish Press. In any case, the decision as to the printing is not in my hands, but in the hands of the Speaker, and I ask the House to allow the Bill to be read the Third time.

Mr. W. ADAMSON: I think the Secretary of State for Scotland has misunderstood the point of complaint. Thy point of complaint is that these proceedings were not printed before the Report stage was arranged. I understood my hon. Friends to say that they intended to put forward Amendments on the Report stage and that the want of the printed proceedings has prevented them carrying out that intention.

Sir J. GILMOUR: Nothing has prevented them from putting down an Amendment on the Paper.

Mr. ADAMSON: Yes. They could not get the printed proceedings of the Committee stage and naturally they wanted to see what was said in the Committee before proceeding to put down their Amendment. I understand that Mr. Speaker has put the Question, "That the Bill be now read the. Third time," but has promised that he will see whether the proceedings can be printed. But that will prevent my hon. Friends from carrying out their suggestion of putting down an
Amendment, and what they want is that the Secretary of State for Scotland should postpone the Bill until a print of the proceedings in Committee is produced. It may be that the Secretary of State for Scotland has no responsibility for no print of the proceedings being available. At the same time, my hon. Friends have a very considerable amount of reason for complaint and I think in the circumstances that the Secretary of State for Scotland will be very well advised to agree to the suggestion that no further proceedings should take place until the proceedings of the Committee have been printed.

Captain BENN: I would like to explain how I stand about this. I do not do so from any reasons of vanity. I did not attend either the Second Reading of the Bill or the Committee stage because I was told on good authority that this Bill merely dealt with the disposal of the Calton gaol and that it was very desirable to wipe away some technicalities as to the disposal of the Calton gaol. Now I find in Clause 2 of the Bill that provision is to be made for people to be detained in people cells for 30 days instead of 14 days. I am quite unable to find out—

Sir HARRY FOSTER: It was fully explained on the Second Reading.

HON. MEMBERS: Nothing of the sort!

Captain BENN: Now the position is that, very unfortunately, at a time when interest in Scottish affairs in this House is greatly stimulated and when there is a growing feeling that more attention should be given to them—

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Why did not you attend the Committee?

Captain BENN: I have already explained my position on that point. Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member himself will one day either attend the Committee or make a speech in this House or do something intelligent. Those who are deprived of these proceedings feel that they have a certain amount of grievance. If it be the case that the Secretary of State for Scotland felt that the proceedings should not be printed and if there is no objection to the Bill, surely it could be taken on another day.

Mr. JAMES BROWN: The only question seems to me to be whether or not this Bill is to be postponed for a day or two. I understand that a promise has been made by all the other Members on this side of the House, and it will certainly be given by me, that there will be no difficulty in the passing of this Bill if it is postponed. The Secretary of State for Scotland must be aware that there is a good deal of feeling in Scotland just now regarding Scottish business in this House and very great efforts are being made to get a Government of our own in Scotland to deal with our own affairs. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] You may be glad to get rid of us. All we are asking now is that the Bill should be merely postponed for a day or two and there will be no difficulty about the Bill whatever. The Scottish members on the other side of the House are, I know, just as obstinate as those on this side, and therefore my appeal may have no effect whatever, but I make it all the same. I appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland to have the proceedings printed so that the Scottish members and the Scottish population may see them.

Mr. MARDY JONES: I venture to rise as a member of the Celtic race, and I want to support the Scottish Members in their attitude on this matter. I think the

Celtic element is being ignored on this business. The Secretary of State for Scotland excused the printing of the Committee's proceedings on the ground that they had been very fully printed in the Scottish Press, but surely he does not suggest that any Scottish newspaper can replace the OFFICIAL REPORT. I entirely dissent from his view that the Scottish Press gives a full enough report. It has been a practice since Labour Members came here to send the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: That has nothing whatever to do with the Motion. The question of the printing of the reports of this Committee was disposed of by the Speaker about an hour ago.

Mr. MARDY JONES: Although the Bill appears to affect Scotland only, a vital principle is at stake, and it is that every Member of this House should have access to the proceedings in Committee on any Bill. I think it necessary to make it clear that it is not only Scottish Members who object to this procedure but others Members as well.

Question put: "That the Debate be now adjourned"

The House divided: Ayes, 16; Noes, 114.

Division No. 543.]
AYES.
[1.10 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife. West)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Welsh, i. C.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kelly, W. T.



Dalton. Hugh
Maxton, James
TELLERS FOR THE AYES —


Day, Colonel Harry
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.


Fenby, r. D.
Stephen, Campbell
Buchanan.


Graham. D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. f.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset,Yeovil)
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)


Albery, Irving James
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hennage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur p.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Dixey, A. C.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Herbert. S.(York. N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Huntingfield. Lord


Boothby, R. J. G.
Fermoy, Lord
Jacob, A. E.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Fielden, E. B.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Brass, Captain W.
Forrest, W.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Looker, Herbert William


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lucas-Tooth. Sir Hugh Vere


Bullock, Captain M.
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Burman, J. B.
Ganzoni, Sir John
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Carver, W. H.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
McLean. Major A.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Goff. Sir Park
Macmillan, Captain H.


Christie, J. A.
Greene, W. P. Crawford
McNeill Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Grotrian, H. Brent
MacRoba.-t, Alexander M.


Cope. Major William
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Makins. Brigadier-General E.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hanbury, C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harrison, G. J. C.
Margesson, Captain D.


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd.Hemel Hempst'd)
Hawke, John Anthony
Mitchell. S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R- (Ayr)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Templeton, W. P.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Thorn, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Tichfield, Major the Marquess of


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Nuttall, Ellis
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Savery, S. S.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Pennefather, Sir John
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Wells, S. R.


Penny, Frederick George
Shaw, Capt. Walter (Wilts, Westb'y)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Skelton, A. N.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wise, Sir Fredric


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Smithers, Waldron
Womersley, W. J.


Raine, W.
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T.


Remer, J. R.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)



Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Streatfield, Captain S. R.
Captain Lord Stanley and Mr.


Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
F. C. Thomson.


Ropner, Major L.




Question put, and agreed to.

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Mr. MAXTON: I regret very much that I am forced into the position of causing discomfort to the Members of the House and to the Officials and attendants about the House merely because the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Prime Minister have chosen to be obstinate, but this is a matter that I regard as being of some serious moment. I do not want to detain the House much longer than is necessary, but to be absolutely fair to the persons who are affected by this Bill. I raised on the Motion for the Adjournment the effect that this very simple Clause that the Secretary of State for Scotland has attached to the Bill the main purpose of which has no connection whatever with the second matter. I have shown the effect of this in my speech on the Motion and the Adjournment and I do not propose to repeat the arguments on the Third Reading, but I want to make an appeal to the House on behalf of the men who are going to be affected by the change proposed in the Bill. Under our present system, in Scotland as in England, while the community comes to the conclusion that certain men and women have got to be shut away behind bars either because they are a menace to the community or the community believes that this correction will make better citizens of them, it is equally true that the community has in the course of years laid down certain regulations to try to secure that the lives of these men shall not be any worse than they need be, and that the men themselves will not feel that there is any vindictive spirit on the part of the State although the State has decreed that they lose their liberty for a period. Under the ordinary prison system, it is laid down that every man
confined in prison must have a certain supply of food every day, which is carefully and regularly supplied to him in measured portions. It is laid down that he shall have medical attention, and to that end a prison doctor is attached to every one of the public prisons. It is laid down that he shall have certain regular exercise, and arrangements are made in the prisons so that every person shall have one hour's open air exercise every day. It is also laid down that the religious denomination to which the prisoner may belong shall have right of entry to the prison so that he may receive the services of the appropriate clergyman of the denomination to which he belongs. It is also laid down that there shall be attached to the prison a library, from which the prisoner may borrow books and read these books either for purposes of moral uplift or education.
These Regulations are carefully carried out in the established prisons of the country under the direction of the Prison Commissioners, and under the supervision of a number of publicly appointed inspectors of prisons. This Bill proposes to transfer practically one - half of the prison population of Scotland out of these prisons, where arrangements are made to secure prisoners these rights, into the police cells, where it is absolutely impossible that these rights can be preserved to the prisoners concerned. There are now in Scotland 30 legalised police cells where it is legal to detain men for 14 days. The increase of the time of detention from 14 days to 31 days means that these places are to have their normal population doubled, and it means that the Prison Inspectors who formerly were responsible for the four or five big central prisons in Scotland have now got to visit regularly prisoners scattered in
30 different police cells throughout the whole of Scotland. If this inspection is going to be carried out—if it is to be efficiently done a very considerable increase must be made in the staff of the Prison Inspectors. If it is not going to be efficiently done, this Assembly, which is approving this Bill, is taking no national precaution to see that the rights of these men are being maintained in this new method of imprisonment. Most hon. Members know the condition of the local police offices and the cells attached to them in their own neighbourhood. I ask them to visualise how it is possible for the local policeman, in addition to the ordinary duties he has to perform in any district for which he is responsible, at the same time to be responsible for the health and welfare of any prisoners that may be confined in the police cells? How is a prisoner going to be fed; to be regularly exercised; how is he going to be allotted proper tasks to occupy his time and have these tasks supervised. How is he going to get the recreation to which he is entitled under the prison rules; how is he going to be fed and clothed?
To all these problems I tried to secure some satisfactory answer in the Scottish Grand Committee, and I failed. The House is prepared to see this matter pass into the hands of the Secretary of State for Scotland, and into the hands of the Prison Commissioners, without any assurance as to the effect upon the men in prison or likely to fall into the hands of the police in future. I am not prepared to take my responsibilities so lightly, even to those men who may be bottom dogs in the community. I am not prepared to disregard a man, though he may be shut up and may not be a voter. I want some idea as to how the Secretary of State for Scotland proposes to see that these cells are made into decent sanitary, healthy dwellings for the extra population under this legislation; I want to know how he is going to staff these places with proper warders to look after the prisoners as in ordinary prisons? How is he going to arrange for medical attention, or give to prisoners the spiritual support or guidance of the clergy of the denomination to which they belong? I want to know whether he is going to establish a prison library from which prisoners may get books for their leisure
moments? Does he propose to give these prisoners regular and proper exercise? I do not know. Is it proposed to keep a man shut up for 24 hours every day for 30 days inside one cell without a breath of fresh air? Is this another reactionary Tory step towards greater vindictiveness in the treatment of the prison population? The Scottish Grand Committee got no satisfaction on any of these points. Some of the most important and influential works in the libraries of this country had to be written and broadcast throughout the land before decent sanitary conditions were established in our prisons. Many devoted men and women spout the greater part of their lives struggling to secure that the prison population should not rye treated worse than was necessary for the public welfare. We are lightheartedly chucking that away. My colleagues and I are distressed that we should be chucking away a state of affairs which was achieved by the Charles Reades and others.
We are here at this late hour because no assurance whatever has been given that the ordinary safeguard and protections which have become the established rule in the State prisons of this country will be available to the men who are confined in these police cells. I for one, considering that we have had no assurance on these points, considering in addition the fact that this throws back from the Central fund a very large charge on the local rates, considering that the Scottish Secretary and the Prime Minister have treated the Scottish Members with complete contempt in the whole matter, and considering that they have not shown the faintest desire for decent treatment aid harmony amongst colleagues of this if House I am going oppose the Third Reading as strenuously as I can.

Captain BENN: I certainly should not have risen had it not been for the failure of the Secretary of State for Scotland to make any reply. I have listened to the extremely eloquent speech that has been made by the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) on the issues that are raised in the Bill. I was of opinion that the Bill did nothing but deal with the disposal of the Calton gaol and similar matters. If these issues are raised I certainly think the House should know. We
have no official record of the proceedings in Committee and I think the Secretary should do something if he can to allay the serious misgivings which such a speech as has been delivered by the hon. Member must necessarily arouse in our minds.

Sir J. GILMOUR: There is nothing in this Bill which does anything further than what exists under the present law, with the exception that what I am asking is power to certify police cells for an extended period. The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) has dilated upon a number of things, and it would be a mischievous thing if it went out to Scotland that there was anything in this Bill that was going to effect a removal of the prison population of Scotland, and to start a new system. There is no intention of that kind at all. There are at present something like 30 certified police cells and these certified police cells are in the main in the most outlying parts of Scotland, in Orkney and Shetland, etc. These are places which are used for detaining people at the present time for 16 days. Take the present position existing in Kirkwall. If that prison is abolished any man now convicted has to be taken by sea to Inverness and detained for a considerable time. He has to be taken back by sea, and boats do not run every day of the week. He may be kept a long time before returning to his own habitation. These are the kind of things that are desired to be dealt with under this Bill. I am asking now merely for power when I am approached by the police authorities in the first instance and if I am satisfied through the Prison Commission that these particular cells are suitable, that the police authorities may have the period of detention extended to 30 days, but only when I am satisfied that they comply with the prison regulations which are set out under the Act of 1877. There the thing is definitely laid down by Statute. The same conditions apply in all the prisons of Scotland. I do not think I can make it clearer and I regret there has been so much time of the House taken up.

Mr. MAXTON: The right hon. Gentle man has not touched the point I have raised, the extending of the time from 14 days to 30, and the number of people to be kept in them. There is no safeguard.

Sir J. GILMOUR: These cells can only be legalised for a certain number of prisoners and for a certain time. If any prisoner thinks he is being treated unfairly by being detained in a legalised cell he can apply to be removed to another prison if the matter is reported to the central authority.

Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.

Orders of the Day — ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACTS.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, with the concurrence of the Minister of Health, and confirmed by tile Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, constituting a joint board consisting of representatives of the urban district council of Urmston and the rural district council of Barton-upon-lrwell, for the joint exercise of powers under the said Acts in respect of the urban district of Urmston and part of the rural district of Barton-upon-Trwell, in the county palatine of Lancaster, which was presented on the 29th day of July, 1926, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the borough of Brecon (other-wise Brecknock), and the parishes of Castle Inn and Christ's College, in the urban district of Brecknock, in the county of Brecknock, which was presented on the 4th day of August., 1926, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the urban districts of Salcombe and Kingsbridge and part of the rural district of Kingsbridge, in the county of Devon, which was presented on the 30th day of August 1926, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the urban districts of Whit-church and Ellesmere, and the rural districts of Whit-church and Ellesmere, in the county of Salop, and the rural district of Malpas, in the county of Chester, which was presented on the 30th clay of August 1926, he approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the urban district of Herne Bay and part of the rural district of Blean, on the county of Kent, and for other purposes, which was presented on the 30th day of August 1926, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under The Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the urban district of Nantwich
and part of the rural district of Nantwich, in the county of Chester, which was presented on the 30th day of August 1926, be approved.—[Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon.]

The remaining Government Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after Half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Monday evening, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to Standing Orders.

Adjourned at Twenty-one Minutes before Two o'Clock, a.m.